Texas v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
292 U.S. 522 · 1934
Citation profile
79 federal appellate · 27 district · 44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 258 later decisions (46 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2012 · most notably Chicago & Southern Air Lines, Inc. v. Waterman Steamship Corp. (1948), United States v. Gilliland (1941)
79 federal appellate · 27 district · 44 state decisions — followed in 11 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 Akron Ry Co v. United States · Colorado v. United States · Railroad Commission v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad · New York Central Securities Corp. v. United States · Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway 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 258 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“economy and efficiency in interstate transportation by the removal of the burdens of excessive expenditure.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The public interest is served by economy and efficiency in operation. * * * “Appellant insists that the delegation of authority to the commission is invalid because the stated criterion is uncertain. That criterion is the ‘public interest’. It is a mistaken assumption that this is a mere general reference to public welfare without any standard to guide determinations. The purpose of the act, the requirements it imposes, and the context of the provision in question show the contrary. # * # ‘ ‘ The provisions now before us were among the additions made by Transportation Act, 1920, and the term ‘public interest’ as thus used is not a concept without ascertainable criterion but has direct relation to adequacy of transportation service, to its essential conditions of economy and efficiency, and to appropriate provision and best nse of transportation facilities, questions to which, the Interstate Commerce Commission has constantly addressed itself in the exercise of the authority conferred. ‘£ The question whether the acquisition of control in the case of competing carriers will aid in preventing an injurious waste and in securing more efficient transportation service is thus committed to the judgment of the administrative agency * *”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is applied as an aid in ascertaining the intention of the legislature, not to subvert it when ascertained.'”
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.