Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food MacHinery & Chemical Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
620 federal appellate · 355 district · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 2,204 later decisions (54 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2025 · most notably Paul v. Davis (1976), Hudson v. Palmer (1984)
620 federal appellate · 355 district · 37 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedFood Machinery & Chemical Corp. v. Walker Process Equipment, Inc. (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 2 (§ 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Relies on Kerotest Mfg Co v. C-O-Two Fire Equipment Co · Precision Instrument Mfg Co v. Automotive Maintenance Machinery Co · Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co. · White Motor Company v. United States
Cited together with Conley v. Gibson · United States v. Grinnell Corp. · United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. · Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc. · California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited
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 2,204 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he area of per se illegality is carefully limited.”
39 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the enforcement of a patent procured by fraud on the Patent Office may be violative of § 2 of the Sherman Act provided the other elements necessary to a § 2 case are present.”
19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“achiev[e] a suitable accommodation in this area between the differing policies of the patent and antitrust laws,”
16 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.