United States v. James a Patten’s Empirical Analysis
226 U.S. 525 · 1913
Citation profile
192 federal appellate · 61 district · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 624 later decisions (141 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2023 · most notably United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. (1940), United States v. Classic (1941)
192 federal appellate · 61 district · 27 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. United States · Swift Company v. United States · United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Ass'n · Addyston Pipe Steel Company v. United States · Northern Securities Company 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 624 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“character and effect of a conspiracy are not to be judged by dismembering it and viewing its separate parts, but only by looking at it as a whole.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“. . . (t)he conspirators must be held to have intended the necessary and direct consequences of their acts, and cannot be heard to say the contrary. In other words, by purposely engaging in a conspiracy which necessarily and directly produces the result which the statute is designed to prevent, they are, in legal contemplation, chargeable with intending that result.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Section 1 of the act, upon which the counts are founded, is not confined to voluntary restraints, as where persons engaged in interstate trade or commerce agree to suppress competition among themselves, but includes as well involuntary restraints, as where persons not so engaged conspire to compel action by others, or to create artificial conditions, which necessarily impede or burden the due course of such trade or commerce and restrict the common liberty to engage therein.””
4 later decisions 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.