United States v. Armour & Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
661 federal appellate · 171 district · 102 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,761 later decisions (22 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2024 · most notably Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores (1975), Brown III v. Felsen (1979)
661 federal appellate · 171 district · 102 state decisions — followed in 18 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. § 18 (§ 7 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 5 (§ 5 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Relies on United States v. Swift & Co. · Swift & Co. v. United States · Hughes v. United States · United States v. Atlantic Refining Co.
Cited together with United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co. · United States v. Swift & Co. · Local Number 93, International Ass'n of Firefighters v. City of Cleveland · Firefighters Local Union No. 1784 v. Stotts · Hughes 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 1,761 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the scope of a consent decree must be discerned within its four corners, and not by reference to what might satisfy the purposes of one of the parties to it.”
151 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“supported by the terms of the consent decree under which it is sought.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“construction of an existing consent decree”
3 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.