Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 369 U.S. 654 - United States v. Diebold, Inc.

United States v. Diebold, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

15,311
cited by 15,311 later decisions
53
cited 53 times by the Supreme Court
26
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

2,081 federal appellate · 1,765 district · 309 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15,311 later decisions (53 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation (1986), Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. (1970)

2,081 federal appellate · 1,765 district · 309 state decisions — followed in 26 states

4.7k01962197019801990200020102020decided

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. § 18 (§ 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 28 U.S.C. § 3

Relies on Drews v. Maryland · International Shoe Co. v. Federal Trade Commission

Cited together with Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.

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 15,311 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “must be viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion.”
    150 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “inferences to be drawn from the [underlying] facts contained in the affidavits, attached exhibits, and depositions submitted below ... must be viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion.”
    5 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.