113 F. Supp. 2d 204 - Objio v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 7 U.S.C. § 2021 · 7 U.S.C. § 2023
Relies on Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · American Power & Light Co. v. Securities & Exchange Commission · Butz v. Glover Livestock Commission Co. · Kulkin v. Bergland · Broad Street Food Market, Inc. v. United States
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No more than $40 worth of goods were sold during each of the seven violations, giving rise to an aggregate of no more than $280 for all the violations. Meanwhile, Objio’s store was sold for $15,000. A penalty proportionate to the $280 involved would fail to deter Objio from evading disqualification by selling her store. She would have had sufficient money to cover the penalty and still have made a profit from the sale of her store. Therefore, by adopting the method of calculation in 7 C.F.R. § 278.6 (g) and not considering the value of the ineligible goods sold in that the calculation, the Service is merely following Congressional intent. It did not act arbitrarily or capriciously.”
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.