Alloy Products Corp. v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 1983
3 federal appellate · 1 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
Relies on 111 F. Supp. 945 - Fruhauf Southwest Garment Co. v. United States · Curry v. Pyramid Life Insurance · Atkinson v. Atkinson · Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. United States · First National Steamship Co. 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * This we do not think can be construed to relieve plaintiff of the effect of the rules. Under plaintiff’s theory, we might just as well discard the rules or hold that they were intended to be meaningless. [ 302 F.2d at 532 , 157 Ct.Cl. at 383 ]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * [W]e believe there is no doubt that the exclusive jurisdiction is within the Tax Court to set aside or reform agreements entered into pursuant to the Renegotiation Act, * * *.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“even threatened financial disaster is not sufficient”
1 later decision 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.