Baltimore Ohio Co v. United States Delaware & Hudson R Corp’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 12 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 108 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2024 · most notably Blanchette v. Connecticut General Insurance Corporations (1974), New Haven Inclusion Cases (1970)
20 federal appellate · 12 district · 6 state decisions
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1336 · 28 U.S.C. § 2284
Relies on Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · United States v. Darby · Ferguson v. Skrupa · Northern Securities Company v. United States · Opp Cotton Mills, Inc. v. Administrator of the Wage & Hour Division of the Department of Labor
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 108 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to weigh alternatives and make its choice according to its judgment how best to achieve and advance the goals of the National Transportation Policy”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[t]he ICC is not the prisoner of the parties' submissions”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence““ ‘Congress has also provided for judicial review as an additional assurance that its policies be executed. That review certainly entails an inquiry as to whether the Commission has employed those statutory standards. If that inquiry is halted at the threshold by reason of the fact that it is impossible to say whether or not those standards have been applied, then that review has indeed become a perfunctory process. If, as seems likely here, an erroneous statutory construction lies hidden in vague findings, then statutory rights will be whittled away. An insistence upon the findings which Congress has made basic and essential to the Commission’s action is no intrusion into the administrative domain. It is no more and no less than an insistence upon the observance of those standards which Congress has made ‘prerequisite to the operation of its statutory command.’ * * * Hence that requirement is not a mere formal one. Only when the statutory standards have been applied can the question be reached as to whether the findings are supported by evidence.’ * * * “Many crucial issues, necessary for evaluation by the Commission, are not even exposed in this record, let alone appraised. The absence of these findings makes judicial review impossible.””
1 later decision 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.