Brown v. Hovatter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. “a trade barrier to the free flow of goods, materials, and other articles of commerce across state lines....” Brown, 561 F.3d at 363 . As such,”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. McBurney v. Young · 681 F. Supp. 2d 635 - American Petroleum Institute v. Cooper

2. “constraint on the power of the States to enact legislation that interferes with or burdens interstate commerce.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ass'n for Accessible Medicines v. Frosh · Johnson v. County of Horry, SC

3. “[T]he plaintiffs are challenging the way Maryland authorizes them to do business within the State in a profession regulated by the State. Their complaints do not involve burdens placed on the interstate movement of goods, materials, or other articles of commerce, and the matters of which they complain' — the manner of professional practice in Maryland — are not matters protected by the dormant Commerce Clause. As the Supreme Court stated in Exxon [Corp. v. Governor of Md., 437 U.S. 117 , 98 S.Ct. 2207 , 57 L.Ed.2d 91 (1978) ], “We cannot ... accept appellants’ underlying notion that the Commerce Clause protects the particular structure or methods of operation in a retail market.... [T]he Clause protects the interstate market, not particular interstate firms, from prohibitive or burdensome regulations.” Exxon, 437 U.S. at 127-28 , 98 S.Ct. 2207 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 682 F. Supp. 2d 1283 - Locke v. Shore