Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 273 U.S. 359 - Eastman Kodak Co of New York v. Southern Photo Materials Co

Eastman Kodak Co of New York v. Southern Photo Materials Co’s Empirical Analysis

273 U.S. 359 · 1927

Citation profile

2,167
cited by 2,167 later decisions
73
cited 73 times by the Supreme Court
30
states following
October 2025
most recently cited

855 federal appellate · 273 district · 168 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,167 later decisions (73 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2025 · most notably Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. (1962), Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. (1969)

855 federal appellate · 273 district · 168 state decisions — followed in 30 states

438019271930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Colgate & Co. · Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering · Keogh v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. · International Harvester Company of America v. Commonwealth of Kentucky

Cited together with Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc. · Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co. · United States v. Scophony Corp. of America · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · United States v. Griffith

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 2,167 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a defendant whose wrongful conduct has rendered difficult ascertainment of the precise damages suffered by the plaintiff, is not entitled to complain that they cannot be measured with the same exactness and precision as would otherwise be possible,”
    38 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““§ 22. District in which to sue corporation “Any suit, action, or proceeding under the antitrust laws against a corporation may be brought not only in the judicial district whereof it is an inhabitant, but also in any district wherein it may be found or transacts business; and all process in such cases may be served in the district of which it is an inhabitant, or wherever it may be found.””
    20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “in fact, in the ordinary and usual sense, it 'transacts business' therein of any substantial character.”
    19 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.