Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 393 U.S. 199 - United States v. Concentrated Phosphate Export Assn., Inc.

United States v. Concentrated Phosphate Export Assn., Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

1,655
cited by 1,655 later decisions
70
cited 70 times by the Supreme Court
19
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

589 federal appellate · 217 district · 74 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,655 later decisions (70 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2025 · most notably Friends of the Earth Incorporateds v. Laidlaw Environmental Services Inc (2000), Powell v. McCormack (1969)

589 federal appellate · 217 district · 74 state decisions — followed in 19 states

43901968197019801990200020102020decided

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. § 29 · 15 U.S.C. § 61 · 15 U.S.C. § 62 · 22 U.S.C. § 2354

Relies on United States v. W. T. Grant Co. · United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Ass'n · Simpson v. United Oil Company of California · United States v. United States

Cited together with United States v. W. T. Grant Co. · Friends of the Earth Incorporateds v. Laidlaw Environmental Services Inc · City of Mesquite v. Aladdin's Castle, Inc. · County of Los Angeles v. Davis · Powell v. McCormack

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 1,655 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to recur.”
    108 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “thought it could increase American exports by depriving foreigners of the benefits of competition among American firms, without in any significant way injuring American consumers.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “reduce[d] the practical importance of this case”
    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.