ALABAMA POWER CO. v. ICKES, FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, Et Al.

1938-01-03 · Supreme Court of the United States · United States

read the judgment

5What it rests on

6Relied 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.

19391 judgments19401 judgments19421 judgments19431 judgments19441 judgments9 years silent19531 judgments

6 judgments have relied on it, across 1939–1953

first 1939 · last 1953 · busiest 1939 (1 judgments)

1953-06-15BARROWS Et Al. v. JACKSONSupreme Court of the United States 1944-02-28STARK ET AL. v. WICKARD, SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE, Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1943-02-08ASSOCIATED INDUSTRIES OF NEW YORK STATE, Inc., v. ICKES, Secretary of the Interior, Et Al.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 1942-04-06Scripps-Howard Radio, Inc. v. Federal Communications CommissionSupreme Court of the United States 1940-04-29PERKINS, SECRETARY OF LABOR, Et Al. v. LUKENS STEEL CO. Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1939-01-30TENNESSEE ELECTRIC POWER CO. Et Al. v. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States

What it rests on

1930-04-14ALEXANDER SPRUNT & SON, INC., Et Al. v. UNITED STATESSupreme Court of the United States 1924-03-03The Chicago Junction CaseSupreme Court of the United States 1923-11-12Edward Hines Yellow Pine Trustees Et Al. v. United States, Interstate Commerce Commission, and American Wholesale Lumber AssociationSupreme Court of the United States 1923-06-11Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, Et Al.; Frothingham v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1882-03-20Railroad Company v. EllermanSupreme Court of the United States

7 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.