Continental Baking Co. v. Woodring’s Empirical Analysis
286 U.S. 352 · 1932
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 20 district · 170 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 388 later decisions (82 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2019 · most notably Bell v. Burson (1971), Ex parte Poresky (1933)
27 federal appellate · 20 district · 170 state decisions — followed in 37 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Champlin Refining Co. v. Corporation Commission · John Hendrick v. State of Maryland · Smith v. Cahoon · Frank Kane v. State of New Jersey · Frost & Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Commission
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 388 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The court found a practical difference between the case of the appellants `who operate fleets of trucks in the conduct of their business and who use the highways daily in the delivery of their products to their customers,' and that *Page 35 of `a farmer who hauls his wheat or livestock to town once or twice a year.' The Legislature in making its classification was entitled to consider frequency and character of use and to adapt its regulations to the classes of operations, which by reason of their habitual and constant use of the highways brought about the conditions making regulation imperative and created the necessity for the imposition of a tax for maintenance and reconstruction.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“`It is obvious that the legislature in setting up such a zone would have to draw the line somewhere and unquestionably it had a broad discretion as to where the line should be drawn.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The objection to the authority given to the public service commission ‘to regulate and supervise the accounts, schedules, service and method of operation,’ ‘to prescribe a uniform system and classification of accounts,’ to require the filing of reports and data, and generally to ‘supervise and regulate’ all the carriers to which the act applies ‘in all matters affecting the relationship’ between such carriers and ‘the traveling and shipping public’ * * * similarly raises no question which can now be considered, as there has been no action or threat of action, so far as appears, by the commission giving ground for the contention that the constitutional rights of the appellants have been or will be invaded. * * * Whatever uncertainty may exist with respect to possible regulations of the commission will be resolved as regulations are promulgated. If any of these transcend constitutional limits, appellants will have their appropriate remedy. * * * “The duty laid upon the commission * * * to insist that motor vehicles shall be maintained ‘in a safe and sanitary condition,’ to prescribe qualifications of operators as to age and hours of service, and to require the reporting of accidents, has manifest reference to considerations of safety. The terms of the statute do not require action by the commission which does not have reasonable relation to that purpose. In this respect, as well as in relation to the other matters above-mentioned, appellants had no right to resort to equity me”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.