Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 316 U.S. 481 - Standard Oil Co of California v. Johnson

Standard Oil Co of California v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

316 U.S. 481 · 1942

Citation profile

713
cited by 713 later decisions
78
cited 78 times by the Supreme Court
15
states following
March 2024
most recently cited

237 federal appellate · 49 district · 69 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 713 later decisions (78 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2024 · most notably Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul (1963), Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co. (1950)

237 federal appellate · 49 district · 69 state decisions — followed in 15 states

1430194219501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Minnesota v. National Tea Co. · United States v. Eliason · Charles Gratiot v. The United States · Standard Oil Co. v. Johnson

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 713 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “to provide convenient and reliable sources where soldiers can obtain their ordinary needs at the lowest possible prices.”
    30 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “or any department thereof for official use of said government.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Whether the California Supreme Court would have construed the Motor Vehicle Fuel License Act as applicable to post exchanges if it had decided the issue of legal status of post exchanges in accordance with this opinion, we have no way of knowing. Hence, a determination here of the constitutionality of such an application of the Act is not called for by the state of the record.””
    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.