Reitz v. Mealey’s Empirical Analysis
314 U.S. 33 · 1941
Citation profile
61 federal appellate · 29 district · 121 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 283 later decisions (17 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2020 · most notably Perez. v. Campbell (1971), Lehman Brothers v. Schein (1974)
61 federal appellate · 29 district · 121 state decisions — followed in 22 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. A case is still cited after being overruled — to note the reversal, distinguish it, or in dissent. 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 Local Loan Co. v. Hunt · International Shoe Co. v. Pinkus · Zavelo v. Reeves · Meyer v. Wells, Fargo & 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 283 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Any appropriate means adopted by the states to insure competence and care on the part of its licensees and to protect others using the highway is consonant with due process. “If the statute went no further, we are clear that it would constitute a valid' exercise of the state’s police power not inconsistent with Section 17 of the Bankruptcy Act. 11 U. S. C. A. Section 35.””
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[bankruptcy . .. the sanctuary for hapless debtors which Congress intended. The bankrupt, instead of receiving by virtue of his discharge ‘a new opportunity in life and a clear field for future effort, unhampered by the pressure and discouragement of pre-existing debt . .. ’ finds himself still entangled with a former creditor.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““The court was of the view that if the amendments are invalid, as inconsistent with sec. 17 of the Bankruptcy Act, they are severable, and that the statute may stand as a complete act without them, since, under the law of New York, a statute, in itself constitutional, is not affected by an unconstitutional amendment; — the amendment dropping out and the original act remaining in force. Decisions of the highest court of the state are cited to this effect. “These decisions hold that, where the original and amending acts were enacted by different legislatures, it cannot be thought that the original act would not have been retained except for the amendments, and this principle has been applied where the amending act declares, as it does in this instance, that the original act is ‘amended to read as follows’ and then contains a redraft of the entire act with the amendment inserted.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
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.