Dixie Ohio Express Co. v. State Revenue Commission’s Empirical Analysis
306 U.S. 72 · 1939
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 6 district · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions (22 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2019 · most notably Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York (1949), Clark v. Paul Gray, Inc. (1939)
2 federal appellate · 6 district · 37 state decisions — followed in 13 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 John Hendrick v. State of Maryland · Frank Kane v. State of New Jersey · Packard v. Banton · Sprout v. City of South Bend · Gwin, White & Prince, Inc. v. Henneford
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In view of the many decisions of this court there can be no serious doubt that where a state at its own expense furnishes special facilities for the use of those engaged in commerce, interstate as well as domestic, it may exact compensation therefor. The amount of the charges and the method of collection are primarily for determination by the state itself; and so long as they are reasonable and are fixed according to some uniform, fair, and practical standard, they constitute no burden on interstate commerce. (Cases cited.) The action of the state must be treated as correct unless the contrary is made to appear. In the instant case there is no evidence concerning the value of the facilities supplied by the state, the cost of maintaining them,, or the fairness of the methods adopted for collecting the charges imposed; and we cannot say from a mere inspection of the statute that its provisions are arbitrary or unreasonable.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a State may not lay a tax on the privilege of engaging in interstate commerce,”
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.