Gregg Dyeing Co. v. Query’s Empirical Analysis
286 U.S. 472 · 1932
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 156 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 280 later decisions (67 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2019 · most notably Maryland v. Louisiana (1981), Nashville St Ry v. Wallace (1933)
16 federal appellate · 156 state decisions — followed in 33 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 Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. · Hebert v. State of Louisiana · Shaffer v. Carter · Indian Motocycle Co. v. United States · St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Arkansas
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 280 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'There is no demand in . . . [the] Constitution that the State shall put its requirements in any one statute,'”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““As to interstate commerce, the questions are (1) whether the Act as applied by the state court imposes a direct burden upon that commerce and (2) whether, although the subject of the tax would otherwise be within the power of the State, the tax is invalid because it creates an unconstitutional discrimination against transactions in interstate commerce. “As to the first question, we are not concerned with what' the tax is called, but with what the statute does. It imposes an exaction with respect to gasoline purchased in other States and brought into South Carolina and there placed by appellants in storage for future use within the State. By the terms of the Act, as construed by the state court and applied to these appellants, interstate commerce in relation to the subject of the tax has ended. The gasoline has come to rest within the State, having been placed in appellants’ storage tanks, and added to appellants’ property kept for local purposes. In such circumstances the State has the authority Go tax the product^ or their storage or sale.’ Texas Co. v. Brown, 258 U. S. 466, 478 , 66 L. Ed. 721, 727 , 42 S. Ct. 375 ; Sonneborn Bros. v. Cureton (Sonneborn Bros. v. Keeling), 262 U. S. 506, 519, 520 , 67 L. Ed. 1095, 1102 , 43 S. Ct. 643 ; Hart Refineries v. Harmon, 278 U. S. 499, 501, 502 , 73 L. Ed. 475 -477, 49 S. Ct. 188 . Not only may local sales of gasoline thus brought into the State be taxed, but its use as well. This was specifically determined in Bowman v. Continenta”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Discrimination like interstate commerce itself is a practical conception. We must deal in this matter, as in others, with substantial distinction, and real injury. Id. 286 U.S. at 481 , 52 S.Ct. at 635 .”
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.