Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 291 U.S. 293 - Local 167 of International Brotherhood of Teamsters Chauffeurs Stablemen Helpers of America v. United States

Local 167 of International Brotherhood of Teamsters Chauffeurs Stablemen Helpers of America v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

291 U.S. 293 · 1934

Citation profile

701
cited by 701 later decisions
96
cited 96 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
September 2010
most recently cited

294 federal appellate · 50 district · 37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 701 later decisions (96 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2010 · most notably National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. (1937), Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. (1969)

294 federal appellate · 50 district · 37 state decisions — followed in 11 states

1810193419401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co. · Swift Company v. United States · Hyde v. United States · United States Bilokumsky v. Tod

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

  1. ““But we need not decide when interstate commerce ends and that which is intrastate begins. The control of the handling, the sales and the prices at the place of origin before the interstate journey begins or in the state of destination where the interstate movement ends may operate directly to restrain and monopolize interstate commerce. * * * The Sherman Act denouncos every conspiracy in restraint of trade including those that are to be carried on by acts constituting intrastate transactions.””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “conclusively established in favor of the United States against those who were found guilty that within the period covered by the indictment the latter were parties to the conspiracy charged.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “should be broad enough to prevent evasion.”
    3 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.