United States v. National Dairy Products Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
517 federal appellate · 143 district · 693 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,884 later decisions (77 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Broadrick v. Oklahoma (1973), Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. (1982)
517 federal appellate · 143 district · 693 state decisions — followed in 47 states
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. § 13A (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 3731
Relies on National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Screws v. United States · Thornhill v. Alabama · United States v. Harriss · Crowell v. Benson
Cited together with United States v. Harriss · Connally v. General Construction Co. · Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. · Kolender v. Lawson · Parker v. Levy
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 1,884 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Void for vagueness simply means that criminal responsibility should not attach where one could not reasonably understand that his contemplated conduct is proscribed.”
78 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“unreasonably low prices for the purposes of destroying competition or eliminating a competitor”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]e also noté that the approach to “vagueness” governing a case like this is different from that followed in cases arising under the First Amendment. There we are concerned with the vagueness of the statute “on its face” because such vagueness may in itself deter constitutionally protected and socially desirable conduct. * * *”
8 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.