Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 899 F.2d 413 - Central Freight Lines v. Interstate Commerce Commission

Central Freight Lines v. Interstate Commerce Commission’s Empirical Analysis

899 F.2d 413 · 1990

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
2
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 2024

11 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

1601990200020102020decided

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. § 2201 · 28 U.S.C. § 2342 · 49 U.S.C. § 10501 · 49 U.S.C. § 302 · 49 U.S.C. § 303 · 5 U.S.C. § 554 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946) · 5 U.S.C. § 706

Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Public Serv. Comm'n of Utah v. Wycoff Co. · Brendale v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation · Frozen Food Express v. United States · Texas New Orleans Railroad Company v. Sabine Tram Company

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

  1. “fixed and persisting intent at the time of shipment.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the case or controversy requirement of Article III 'does not restrict an agency's authority to issue declaratory rulings under 5 U.S.C. § 554 (e).'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he ICC did not decide that the use of a storage-in-transit privilege was dispositive of the interstate nature of the movement. The ICC noted that it was a “strong indication” of the through character of the movement, but relied in addition on the “incidents” surrounding the involved transportation. Without discussing them in detail, the ICC noted such indicia as the tracking and documentation linking the shipments coming in and going out of Arlington, and the fact that the goods are not processed, other than being cut to specification, at the temporary storage point.”
    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.