Klinger v. Rose’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 20 (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 26 (§ 16 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 77B (§ 2 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78C (§ 3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 16 U.S.C. § 796 (§ 3 of the Federal Power Act of 1920)
Relies on United States v. Borden Co. · Minneapolis St Louis Railway Company v. United States · 13 F. Supp. 888 - In Re Missouri Pac. R. Co.
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 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The evident purpose of § 10 of the Clayton Act was to prohibit a corporation from abusing a carrier by palming off upon its securities, supplies and other articles without competitive bidding and at excessive prices through overreaching by, or other misfeasance of, common directors, to the financial injury of the carrier and the consequent impairment of its ability to serve the public interest.” (Footnote omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Klinger v. Rose
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.