United States v. Rock Royal Co-Op Noyes’s Empirical Analysis
307 U.S. 533 · 1939
Citation profile
430 federal appellate · 116 district · 144 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,190 later decisions (151 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc. (1961), Yakus v. United States (1944)
430 federal appellate · 116 district · 144 state decisions — followed in 25 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 Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. · Nebbia v. People of State of New York · Gibbons v. Ogden · Ala Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States
Cited together with Currin v. Wallace · Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins · Nebbia v. People of State of New York · Ala Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States · Stark v. Wickard
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 1,190 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[E]ach enactment must be considered to determine whether it states the purpose which the Congress seeks to accomplish and the standards by which that purpose is to be worked out with sufficient exactness to enable those affected to understand these limits. Within these tests the Congress needs specify only so far as is reasonably practicable.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to establish and maintain such orderly marketing conditions for agricultural commodities in interstate commerce as will establish, as the prices to farmers, parity prices * * *.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(C) In order to accomplish the purposes set forth in paragraphs (A) and (B) of this subsection (5), providing a method for making adjustments in payments, as among handlers (including producers who are also handlers), to the end that the total sums paid by each handler shall equal the value of the milk purchased by him at the prices fixed in accordance with paragraph (A) hereof.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.