Peirce v. Van Dusen’s Empirical Analysis
78 F. 693 · 1897
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2008 · most notably Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad (1912), Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. McGuire (1911)
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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
Relies on Aaron Cooley v. The Board of Wardens of the Port of Philadelphia to the Use of the Society for the Relief of Distressed Pilots Their Widows and Children Same · Smith v. State of Alabama · Sherlock v. Alling · Missouri Pac Ry Co v. Mackey · Vicksburg v. O'Brien
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Ohio statute is not applicable alone to railroad corporations of Ohio, engaged in the domestic commerce of this State. It is equally applicable to railroad corporations doing business in Ohio, and engaged in commerce among the States, although the statute, in its operation, may affect in some degree a subject over which Congress can exert full power. The States may do many things affecting commerce with foreign nations and among the several States until Congress covers the subject by National legislation. . . •. Undoubtedly the whole subject of the liability of interstate railroad companies for the negligence of those in their service may be covered by National legislation enacted by Congress under its power to regulate commerce among the States.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““We think it clear that the Ohio statute is not obnoxious to the constitutional provision requiring all laws of a general nature to have a uniform operation throughout the state. As it applies to all railroad, corporations operating railroads within the state, it is, within the meaning of the state Constitution, general in its nature; and, as it applies to all of a given class of railroad employes, it operates uniformly throughout the state.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kane v. Erie R.“While the intention of the legislature must be ascertained from the words used to express it, the manifest reason and obvious purpose of the law should not be sacrificed to a literal interpretation of such words.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.