199 F. Supp. 2d 397 - Bolick v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
7 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 27 U.S.C. § 205 (Federal Alcohol Administration Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Thomas v. Arn · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The state is therefore both a regulator and a competitor which prevents application of the market participant exception in regard to the state's sale of wine because the Commerce Clause acts as an implied restraint upon state regulatory powers . . . involving interstate commerce”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Brooks v. Vassar“accomplish its legitimate interests without discriminating against out-of-state direct shippers of wine”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Heald v. Engler“preference for in-state wineries ... cannot by sustained because it is but a pretext for exclusion”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Dickerson v. Bailey
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.