Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 451 F.2d 3 - Columbia Nitrogen Corp. v. Royster Co.

Columbia Nitrogen Corp. v. Royster Co.’s Empirical Analysis

451 F.2d 3 · 1971

Citation profile

91
cited by 91 later decisions
7
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

38 federal appellate · 9 district · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably Pony Creek Cattle Co. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. (1979), Kestenbaum v. Falstaff Brewing Corp. (1975)

38 federal appellate · 9 district · 12 state decisions

35019711980199020002010decided

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) · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)

Relies on Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United States · International Salt Co. v. United States · Perma Life Mufflers, Inc. v. International Parts Corp. · Fortner Enterprises, Inc. v. United States Steel Corp. · Sola Electric Co. v. Jefferson Electric Co.

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

  1. “shall be liberally construed and applied to promote its underlying purposes and policies,”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(W)hen parties of substantially equal economic strength mutually participate in the formulation and execution of the scheme and bear equal responsibility for the consequent restraint of trade, each is barred from seeking treble damages from the other.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The express terms of an agreement and an applicable course of dealing or usage of trade shall be construed wherever reasonable as consistent with each other; but when such construction is unreasonable express terms control both course of dealing and usage of trade and course of dealing controls usage of trade.”
    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.