Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 371 F.2d 263 - Florists' Nationwide Telephone Delivery Network — America's Phone-Order Florists, Inc. v. Florists' Telegraph Delivery Association

Florists' Nationwide Telephone Delivery Network — America's Phone-Order Florists, Inc. v. Florists' Telegraph Delivery Association’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
October 2006
most recently cited

33 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2006 · most notably McI Communications Corporation McI v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company (1983), Florists' Nationwide Telephone Delivery Network-America's Phone-Order Florists, Inc. v. Florists' Telegraph Delivery Ass'n (1967)

33 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

18019671970198019902000decided

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 United States v. Munsingwear, Inc. · Beacon Theaters Inc v. C Westover · Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc. · Times-Picayune Pub Co v. United States · Board of Trade of City of Chicago v. United States

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

  1. “contrary to or inconsistent with the jury's resolution . . . of that same issue as implicitly reflected in its general verdict . . . on the damages claim.”
    2 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.