Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 364 U.S. 40 - Armstrong v. United States

Armstrong v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

1960

Citation profile

2,125
cited by 2,125 later decisions
94
cited 94 times by the Supreme Court
38
states following
August 2025
most recently cited

366 federal appellate · 116 district · 532 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,125 later decisions (94 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2025 · most notably Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City (1978), Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council (1992)

366 federal appellate · 116 district · 532 state decisions — followed in 38 states

56001960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon · United States v. Causby · Rodriguez v. New York · United States v. General Motors Corp.

Cited together with Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City · Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon · Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp. · Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council · Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co.

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 2,125 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.”
    88 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
    30 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “Before the liens were destroyed, the lienholders admittedly had compensable property. Immediately afterwards, they had none. This was not because their property vanished into thin air. It was because the Government for its own advantage destroyed the value of the liens.”
    12 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.