Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 331 U.S. 519 - Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad’s Empirical Analysis

331 U.S. 519 · 1947

Citation profile

1,456
cited by 1,456 later decisions
57
cited 57 times by the Supreme Court
19
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

703 federal appellate · 86 district · 104 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,456 later decisions (57 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably Almendarez-Torres v. United States (1998), Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr (2001)

703 federal appellate · 86 district · 104 state decisions — followed in 19 states

3590194719501960197019801990200020102020decided

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.

Relationships

Relies on Chicago Junction Case · United States v. Fisher · C. W. Cornell v. F. E. Coyne · United States v. California Coöperative Canneries

Cited together with Sutphen Estates, Inc. v. United States · Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Almendarez-Torres v. United States · Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey

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 1,456 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “cannot undo or limit that which the text makes plain”
    71 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Our jurisdiction to consider an appeal from an order denying intervention thus depends upon the nature of the applicant’s right to intervene. If the right is absolute, the order is appealable and we may judge it on the merits. But if the matter is one within the discretion of the trial court and if there is no abuse of discretion, the order is not appealable and we lack the power to review it.””
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “but a short-hand reference to the general subject matter”
    5 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.