Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 347 U.S. 514 - United States v. Borden Co.

United States v. Borden Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

428
cited by 428 later decisions
26
cited 26 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
May 2021
most recently cited

183 federal appellate · 58 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 428 later decisions (26 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2021 · most notably Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc (1985), Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. (1969)

183 federal appellate · 58 district · 11 state decisions

151019541960197019801990200020102020decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 12 (§ 1 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 25 (§ 15 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 26 (§ 16 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 29 · 28 U.S.C. § 2111

Relies on United States v. W. T. Grant Co. · Federal Trade Commission v. Cement Institute · New Jersey v. New York · Beegle v. Thomson

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

  1. “private and public [Clayton Act] actions were designed to be cumulative, not mutually exclusive.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “* * * (T)he scheme of the statute is sharply to distinguish between Government suits, either criminal or civil, and private suits for injunctive relief or for treble damages. Different policy considerations govern each of these. They may proceed simultaneously or in disregard of each other.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Under § 16 * * * a private plaintiff may obtain injunctive relief against * * * violations only on a showing of 'threatened loss or damage'; and this must be of a sort personal to the plaintiff * * * (citation omitted).”
    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.