Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 294 U.S. 330 - Perry v. United States

Perry v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

294 U.S. 330 · 1935

Citation profile

638
cited by 638 later decisions
46
cited 46 times by the Supreme Court
22
states following
August 2022
most recently cited

160 federal appellate · 42 district · 84 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 638 later decisions (46 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2022 · most notably Harmelin v. Michigan (1991), United States Trust Company of New York v. New Jersey (1977)

160 federal appellate · 42 district · 84 state decisions — followed in 22 states

14901935194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Yick Wo v. Hopkins · M'Culloch v. State of Maryland · Cannon v. United States · Lynch v. United States · Reagan v. Farmers' Loan & Trust 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 638 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The fact that the United States may not be sued without its consent is a matter of procedure which does not affect the legal and binding character of its contracts. While the Congress is under no duty to provide remedies through the courts, the contractual obligation still exists, and, despite infirmities of procedure, remains binding upon the conscience of the sovereign.””
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Congress was free to reduce gratuities deemed excessive. But Congress was without power to reduce expenditures by abrogating contractual obligations of the United States. To abrogate contracts, in the attempt to lessen government expenditure, would be not the practice of economy, but an act of repudiation.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “To say that the Congress may withdraw or ignore [its pledge to repay on the credit of the United States] is to assume that the Constitution contemplates a vain promise, a pledge having no other sanction than the pleasure and convenience of the pledgor. This Court has given no sanction to such a conception of the obligations of our Government.”
    6 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.