Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 321 U.S. 489 - Vinson v. Washington Gas Light Co.

Vinson v. Washington Gas Light Co.’s Empirical Analysis

321 U.S. 489 · 1944

Citation profile

175
cited by 175 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

38 federal appellate · 12 district · 22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 175 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2024 · most notably Interstate Commerce Commission v. Jersey City (1944), Jennifer Johnson Aimee Bogrow v. Board of Regents of the University of Georgia Antoine Hester (2001)

38 federal appellate · 12 district · 22 state decisions

480194419501960197019801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedWashington Gas Light Co. v. Byrnes (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Davies Warehouse Co. v. Bowles · Galveston Electric Co. v. City of Galveston · City of Yonkers v. United States · Washington Gas Light Co. v. Byrnes

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

  1. “an intervenor is admitted to the proceeding as it stands, and in respect of the pending issues, but is not permitted to enlarge those issues”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Thus it appears that the controversy is essentially one between two governmental agencies as to whether the powers of the one or the other are preponderant in the circumstances. In view of the petitioners’ insistence that they were entitled, in effect, to control and direct the inquiry without, regard to the statutory powers of the Commission, we shall first examine the extent of the authority conferred upon petitioners by Congress.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he granting of a petition to intervene shall not have the effect of changing or enlarging the issues in the proceeding, except where such change or enlargement is expressly requested in the petition and is expressly granted by the Commission after opportunity for hearing upon the question has been afforded all other parties.”
    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.