Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 316 U.S. 486 - Query v. United States

Query v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

316 U.S. 486 · 1942

Citation profile

189
cited by 189 later decisions
31
cited 31 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
February 1992
most recently cited

58 federal appellate · 39 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 189 later decisions (31 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1992 · most notably Steffel v. Thompson (1974), Turner v. Fouche (1970)

58 federal appellate · 39 district · 3 state decisions

810194219501960197019801990decided

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

reviewedQuery v. United States (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Phillips v. United States · Ex parte Bransford · Stratton v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. · Guggenheim v. Rasquin

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

  1. ““But the complainants sought to restrain the state officers from enforcing the state statute upon the ground of the unconstitutionality of the threatened application. Not only was unconstitutionality the ground asserted by the complaints for the relief sought, but it appears that the relief awarded was predicated on the same ground.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Here a substantial charge has been made that a state statute, as applied to the complainants, violates the Constitution. Under such circumstances, we have held that relief in the form of an injunction can be afforded only by a three-judge court -* * *»”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “injunction restraining the enforcement, operation or execution of any State statute by restraining the action of any officer of such State in the enforcement or execution of such statute”
    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.