United States v. General Motors Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
323 U.S. 373 · 1945
Citation profile
398 federal appellate · 101 district · 368 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,794 later decisions (112 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2024 · most notably Brady v. State of Maryland (1963), Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City (1978)
398 federal appellate · 101 district · 368 state decisions — followed in 39 states
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
reviewedGeneral Motors Corp. v. United States (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Miller · United States ex rel. Tennessee Valley Authority v. Powelson · Mitchell v. United States · United States v. Cora Welch
Cited together with Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City · Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon · Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States · Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp. · United States v. Causby
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 1,794 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the group of rights inhering in the citizen's relation to the physical thing, as the right to possess, use and dispose of it.”
85 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * Proof of such costs [necessary costs to condemnee for removal of personal property, its storage and its return] as affecting market value is to be distinguished from proof of value peculiar to the respondent [condemnee], or the value of good-will or of injury to the business of the respondent which, in this case, as in the case of the condemnation of a fee, must be excluded from the reckoning.””
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is altogether another matter when the Government does not take his entire interest, but by the form of its proceeding chops it into bits, of which it takes only what it wants, however few or minute, and leaves him holding the remainder, which may then be altogether useless to him, refusing to pay more than the ‘market rental value’ for the use of the chips so cut off. This is neither the ‘taking’ nor the ‘just compensation’ the Fifth Amendment contemplates.” United States v. General Motors Corp., 323 U.S. 373 at 382 , 65 S.Ct. 357, 361 , 89 L.Ed. 311 (1945)”
6 later decisions 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.