Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 443 F.2d 264 - Curtis C. Flood v. Bowie K. Kuhn

Curtis C. Flood v. Bowie K. Kuhn’s Empirical Analysis

443 F.2d 264 · 1971

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 6 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2016 · most notably Flood v. Kuhn (1972), United Nuclear Corp. v. General Atomic Co. (1980)

14 federal appellate · 6 district · 9 state decisions

21019711980199020002010decided

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

Relationships

Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Giboney v. Empire Storage & Ice Co. · Southern Pac Co v. State of Arizona Sullivan · Huron Portland Cement Company v. City of Detroit Michigan · Watson v. Buck

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

  1. ““differing state regulation, although not conflicting, requires the enterprise to comply with the strictest standard of several states, [however,] the extra-territorial effect which the application of a particular state law would exact constitutes, absent a strong state interest,, an impermissible burden on interstate commerce.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “are dependent on the league playing schedule . . . . Therefore, it is the league structure at which any state antitrust regulation must be aimed . [E]ach league extends over many states, and . . , if state regulation were permissible, the internal structure of the leagues would require compliance with the strictest state antitrust standard.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the burden on interstate commerce outweighs the states' interest in regulating baseball's reserve system [and thus] the Commerce Clause precludes the application here of State anti-trust law.”
    1 later decision 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.