Uelman v. Freeman’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 1980
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 7 U.S.C. § 601 · 7 U.S.C. § 602 · 7 U.S.C. § 608C (Food and Agriculture Act of 1965) · 7 U.S.C. § 608E
Relies on Stark v. Wickard · United States v. Ruzicka · Petrowski v. Hawkeye-Security Insurance · Benson v. Schofield · United Milk Producers v. Benson
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1. The basic formula price (§ 1039.50) resulting from prices paid for manufacturing milk in Minnesota and Wisconsin adjusted to 3.5% butterfat basis at the rate of the butter price times 0.120 ; 2. To this add $1.08, $.68 or $.88 depending on the month involved (§ 1039.51(a)); and 3. Add or subtract the amount resulting from the supply-demand ratio computed under the Chicago Order (7 C.F.R. 1030) but not to exceed plus 24 or minus 24 cents (§ 1039.51(a)). In the event any of these pricing factors is not available, then § 1039.54 of the Order requires that the Secretary shall determine an equivalent pricing factor to be utilized in the price computation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Uelmen v. Freeman
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.