Bayside Fish Flour Co. v. Gentry’s Empirical Analysis
297 U.S. 422 · 1936
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 30 district · 123 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 246 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2016 · most notably Parker v. Brown (1943), Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co. (1981)
22 federal appellate · 30 district · 123 state decisions — followed in 23 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 Adkins v. Children's Hospital of the District of Columbia Same · Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. McGuire · Atchison Co v. Matthews · John McLean v. State of Arkansas · Foster-Fountain Packing Co. v. Haydel
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 246 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It never has been found possible to lay down any infallible or all-inclusive test by the application of which it may be determined whether a given difference between the subjects of legislation is enough to justify the subjection of one and not the other to a particular form of disadvantage. A very large number of decisions have dealt with the matter; and the nearest approach to a definite rule which can be extracted from them is that, while the difference need not be great, the classification must not be arbitrary or capricious, but must bear some just and reasonable relation to the object of the legislation. A particular classification is not invalidated by the Fourteenth Amendment merely because inequality actually results. Every classification of persons or things for regulation by law produces inequality in some degree; but the law is not thereby rendered invalid, * * *, unless the inequality produced be actually and palpably unreasonable and arbitrary. * * * ””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““as a shield against the covert depletion of the local supply, and thus tends to effectuate the policy of the law by rendering evasion of it less easy.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]o the extent that [the statute,] as it relates to possession of `small shrimp'[,] may affect interstate or foreign commerce, we find that this result is purely incidental, indirect, and beyond the purpose of the legislation and does not invalidate the statute.”
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.