Swank v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis
139 F.2d 145 · 1943
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently July 1984
9 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
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 15 U.S.C. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 2 (§ 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 41
Relies on United States v. Cruikshank · Civil Rights Cases · Virginia v. Rives · Osborne v. County of Adams · United States v. Harris
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“19 Whatever may be the intended effect of the simplified and liberal provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C. in the ordinary run of civil litigation, I cannot believe that it was intended to sanction a review of the whole record of decision by an administrative tribunal, simply because the plaintiff in the action seeking such review asserts that the decision complained of was”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Michaelson v. Herren
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.