Warren v. Palmer’s Empirical Analysis
310 U.S. 132 · 1940
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 15 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 158 later decisions (23 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1989 · most notably Gardner v. State of New Jersey (1947), Group of Institutional Investors v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad (1943)
38 federal appellate · 15 district · 6 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedPalmer v. Warren (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Thompson v. Magnolia Petroleum Co. · Continental Illinois Nat Bank Trust Co of Chicago v. Chicago R I & P Ry Co · Isaacs v. Hobbs Tie & Timber Co. · Palmer v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Ex parte Baldwin
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 158 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The property of the Boston and Providence came into the possession of the trustees of the New Haven and the Old Colony and remained there during the entire time covered by the claim. These roads were lessees of the property and debtors under Sec. 77 in the Connecticut court. It is immaterial what title the debtors had, whether a lease or a fee. The physical property covered by the lease was in the custody of the Connecticut court by virtue of the provisions of Sec. 77(a) . . . . 20 ______ 21 * * * 22 . . . In view of the public importance of rail service, we think this subsection [Sec. 77(c) (6)] represents an intention to give the court charged with operation the fullest ability to secure the necessities of operation-an intention to give the operating court power to promise those having the materials, men and equipment needed for operation a first lien on the road to secure payment for the operation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““If a lease of a line of railroad is rejected, and if the lessee, with the approval of the judge, shall elect no longer to operate the leased line, it shall be the duty of the lessor at the end of a period to be fixed by the judge to begin the operation of such line, unless the judge, upon the petition of the lessor, shall decree after hearing that it would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest for the lessor to operate the said line, in which event it shall be the duty of the lessee to continue operation on or for the account of the lessor until the abandonment of such line is authorized by the Commission in accordance with the provisions of section 1 of the Interstate Commerce Act as amended.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the court charged with operation the fullest ability to secure the necessities of operation,”
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.