Roland Electrical Co. v. Walling’s Empirical Analysis
326 U.S. 657 · 1946
Citation profile
250 federal appellate · 64 district · 45 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 558 later decisions (31 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2018 · most notably Arnold v. Ben Kanowsky, Inc. (1960), Rutherford Food Corp. v. McComb (1947)
250 federal appellate · 64 district · 45 state decisions — followed in 10 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
reviewedWalling v. Roland Electrical Co. (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · United States v. American Trucking Associations · United States v. Carolene Products Co. · United States v. Darby · Kirschbaum v. Walling US Arsenal Bldg Corporation
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 558 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`Wholesaling includes all marketing transactions in which the purchaser is actuated solely by a profit or business motive in making the purchase.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(j) “Produced” means produced, manufactured, mined, handled, or in any other manner worked on in any State; and for the purposes of this Act an employee shall be deemed to have been engaged in the production of goods if such employee was employed in producing, manufacturing, mining, handling, transporting, or in any other manner working on such goods, or in any closely related process or occupation directly essential to the production thereof, in any State. (Emphasis supplied.)”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“employees of only such retail or service establishments as are comparable to the local merchant, corner grocer or filling station operator who sells to or serves ultimate consumers who are at the end of, or beyond, that `flow of goods in commerce' which it is the purpose of the Act to reach.”
3 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.