Adams v. Mills’s Empirical Analysis
286 U.S. 397 · 1932
Citation profile
55 federal appellate · 19 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 184 later decisions (35 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2020 · most notably Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corp. (1968), Maislin Industries, U. S., Inc. v. Primary Steel, Inc. (1990)
55 federal appellate · 19 district · 14 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedAdams v. Mellon (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Great Northern Railway Co. v. Merchants Elevator Co. · Missouri Pac Co v. Ault · Lewis v. Reynolds · Southern Pacific Co. v. Darnell-Taenzer Lumber Co. · Spiller v. Atchison T & S F Ry Co
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 184 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he rights of the shippers in the proceeds of the action will not be affected by [the Court's] decision,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“That the yards are, in effect, terminals of the railroads is clear. They are in fact used as terminals; and necessarily so. Whether the unloading in the yards was a part of transportation was not a pure question of law to be determined by merely reading the tariffs. Compare Great Northern Ry. Co. v. Merchants Elevator Co., 259 U. S. 285 , 294. The decision of the question was dependent upon the determination of certain facts, including the history of the Stock Yards and their relation to the line-haul carriers; the history of the unloading charge at these yards; and the action of the parties in relation thereto. If there was evidence to sustain the Commission’s findings on these matters, its conclusion that the collection of the extra charge from the shippers was an unreasonable and unlawful practice must be sustained. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. United States, 232 U. S. 199 , 221; Los Angeles Switching Case, 234 U. S. 294 , 310, 311.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“all necessary service of unloading and . . . delivery”
1 later decision 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.