Black and White Taxicab and Transfer Company v. Brown and Yellow Taxicab and Transfer Company

1928-04-09 · Supreme Court of the United States · United States

read the judgment

12What it rests on

2Relied on since

0Departed from

Relied on since

The judgments that cite this one. This is the answer that tells you the case is still alive.

19381 judgments27 years silent19651 judgments

2 judgments have relied on it, across 1938–1965

first 1938 · last 1965 · busiest 1938 (1 judgments)

1965-04-26Hanna v. Plumer, ExecutorSupreme Court of the United States 1938-04-25Erie Railroad Co. v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States×3

What it rests on

1927-11-21Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company v. Goodman, AdministratrixSupreme Court of the United States 1924-02-18Salem Trust Company v. Manufacturers’ Finance Company Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1923-01-02MASON ET AL. v. UNITED STATES; EUBANK ET AL v. UNITED STATES; MacMULLEN ET AL. v. UNITED STATES; MATTHEWS ET AL. v. UNITED STATES; HUNSICKER ET AL. v. UNITED STATES; NORVELL ET AL. v. UNITED STATES; PALMER ET AL. v. UNITED STATES; ARKANSAS NATURAL GAS COMPANY ET AL. v. UNITED STATESSupreme Court of the United States 1897-02-15Oakes v. MaseSupreme Court of the United States 1893-11-27Gardner v. Michigan Central Railroad CompanySupreme Court of the United States 1893-01-03Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Company v. PrenticeSupreme Court of the United States 1889-03-05Liverpool and Great Western Steam Company v. Phenix Insurance CompanySupreme Court of the United States 1883-01-29Burgess v. SeligmanSupreme Court of the United States 1880-01-12Hough v. Railway CompanySupreme Court of the United States 1873-10-27Boyce v. TabbSupreme Court of the United States 1873-10-20Railroad Company v. LockwoodSupreme Court of the United States 1842-01-25John Swift v. George W. TysonSupreme Court of the United States

38 point outside the corpus. Read from the text, but no judgment held here answers to them. They are counted rather than hidden: this corpus is a slice, not the law.

Departed from

No judgment recorded a departure from this one.

Departure is not detected yet, and the gap is deliberate. Searching for the words the Court might use was measured on 1,019 judgments: "depart from" appears 100 times and most often means departing from the facts found by a domestic court; "overruled" appears 44 times, usually about a domestic judgment; "abandon" appears 123 times, most often as abandoned firearms. Tightened to require the Court itself as the subject, precision was still around 40%, the rest being a dissenting judge complaining, or a national supreme court departing from its own case-law. Telling a lawyer an authority is dead when it is alive is worse than saying nothing, so nothing is what this says until each candidate can be judged properly.

not characterised

Most citations carry no word at all. The Court does not always say what it is doing when it cites one of its own judgments, and where it stayed silent nothing is inferred here.