Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 324 U.S. 244 - Gemsco, Inc. v. Walling

Gemsco, Inc. v. Walling’s Empirical Analysis

324 U.S. 244 · 1945

Citation profile

703
cited by 703 later decisions
25
cited 25 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
October 2019
most recently cited

287 federal appellate · 47 district · 130 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 703 later decisions (25 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2019 · most notably General Electric Co. v. Gilbert (1976), Mourning v. Family Publications Service, Inc. (1973)

287 federal appellate · 47 district · 130 state decisions — followed in 11 states

194019451950196019701980199020002010decided

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

reviewedGuiseppi v. Walling (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Phelps Dodge Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board · Hecht Co. v. Bowles · Ala Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States · Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins · Armour & Co. v. Wantock

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

  1. “The plain words and meaning of a statute cannot be overcome by a legislative history which, through strained processes of deduction from events of wholly ambiguous significance, may furnish dubious bases for inference in every direction.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ * * * The construction sought would make the statute a dead letter * * *_ The statute itself thus gives the answer. It does so in two ways, by necessity to avoid self-nullification and by its explicit terms. The necessity should be enough. * * * •>”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[I]f the [proposed restrictions on homeworkers] cannot be made, the floor for the entire industry falls and the right of the homeworkers and the employers to be free from the prohibition destroys the right of the much larger number of factory workers to receive the minimum wage”
    2 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.