Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 OKCIVAPP 120 - Major v. Microsoft Corp.

Major v. Microsoft Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
5
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914)

Relies on Patterson v. McLean Credit Union · Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois · Atlantic Richfield Company v. Usa Petroleum Company · California v. Arc America Corp. · Kansas v. UtiliCorp United 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Congress ha[s] not preempted the field of antitrust law, but rather intend[s] the federal antitrust laws to supplement, not displace, state antitrust remedies.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with Federal Antitrust Law 15 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. and the case law applicable thereto.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “any person who is injured in his or her business or property by a violation of the act,”
    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.