Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 452 U.S. 205 - Anderson Bros. Ford v. Valencia

Anderson Bros. Ford v. Valencia’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

583
cited by 583 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

165 federal appellate · 65 district · 59 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 583 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2020 · most notably 131 S. Ct. 871 - Chase Bank USA, N. A. v. McCoy (2011), American Express Co. v. Koerner (1981)

165 federal appellate · 65 district · 59 state decisions — followed in 11 states

229019811990200020102020decided

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

reviewedValencia v. Anderson Bros. Ford (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 102 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1604 (§ 105 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1614 (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1631 (§ 121 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1638 (§ 128 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1639 (§ 129 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (§ 130 of the Truth in Lending Act)

Relies on United States v. United Mine Workers of America · Bradley v. School Board of City of Richmond · United States v. American Trucking Associations · Rector Etc of Holy Trinity Church v. United States · Thorpe v. Housing Authority of Durham

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

  1. “[A]bsent some obvious repugnance to the statute, the ... regulation [of the Federal Reserve Board implementing the TILA] should be accepted by the courts, as should the Board's interpretation of its own regulation.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Security interest” means an interest in property that secures performance of a consumer credit obligation and that is recognized by state or federal law. It does not include incidental interests such as interests in proceeds ....”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “effectuate the purpose of [the Act], to prevent circumvention or evasion thereof, or to facilitate compliance therewith.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.