Richard A. Williams and Alfred S. Trask v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission, D.C. Transit System, Inc., Intervenor. Democratic Central Committee of the District of Columbia, Leonard N. Bebchick and Daniel W. Gottlieb v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission, D.C. Transit System, Inc., Intervenor. D.C. Transit System, Inc. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission’s Empirical Analysis
415 F.2d 922 · 1969
Citation profile
79 federal appellate · 6 district · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 142 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General v. Consumer Publishing Co. (1985), Texaco Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Department of Consumer Affairs (1995)
79 federal appellate · 6 district · 30 state decisions — followed in 13 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.
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 38 · 26 U.S.C. § 46
Relies on Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation Same · Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States · United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. · Crowell v. Benson
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 142 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[o]rdinarily, of course, the proper disposition on setting aside a rate increase unlawfully ordered by the Commission would be to compel the regulated company to restore the entire difference between the higher fares collected under the invalid order and the amount that it would have received from the fare schedule previously in effect. 44”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“. . . Commission has respected procedural requirements, has made findings based on substantial evidence, and has applied the correct legal standards to its substantive deliberations.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“give legal effect to the Commission's invalid order.”
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.