McMillen v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis
95 U.S. 37 · 1877
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 10 district · 126 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 224 later decisions (41 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1983 · most notably Phillips v. Commissioner (1931), Phillips v. Commissioner (1931)
2 federal appellate · 10 district · 126 state decisions — followed in 36 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
Relies on John Den James Murray and John Kayser v. The Hoboken Land and Improvement Company John Den James B Murray et al. · Allen v. Armstrong
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 224 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Looking at the Louisiana statute here assailed—the act of March 14, 1873,—we feel bound to say, that, if it is void on the ground assumed, the revenue laws of nearly all the States will be found void for the same reason. The mode of assessing taxes in the States by the Federal government, and by all governments, is necessarily summary, that it may be speedy and effectual. By summary is not meant arbitrary, or unequal, or illegal. It must, under our Constitution, be lawfully done.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““That rule is that a law authorizing the imposition of a tax or assess■ment upon property according to its value does not infringe that provision of the fourteenth amendment to the constitution which declares that no state shall deprive any person of property without due process of law, if the ■owner has an..opportunity to question the validity or the amount of it, either before that amount is determined, or in subsequent proceedings for its collection.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““It seems to be supposed that it is essential to the validity of this tax that the party charged should have been present or had an opportunity to be present in some tribunal when he was assessed. But this is not and never has. been considered necessary to the validity of a tax.””
4 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.