Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
415 federal appellate · 113 district · 70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,185 later decisions (46 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2024 · most notably Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc. (1992), Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 v. Hyde (1984)
415 federal appellate · 113 district · 70 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedArizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Diebold, Inc. · United States v. W. T. Grant Co. · United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. · Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United States · Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. United States
Cited together with National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma · National Society of Professional Engineers v. United States · Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United States · Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Continental Inc v. Gte Sylvania Incorporated
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 1,185 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Once experience with a particular kind of restraint enables the Court to predict with confidence that the rule of reason will condemn it, it has applied a conclusive presumption that the restraint is unreasonable.”
26 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[e]very contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal.”
24 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“requires the factfinder to decide whether under all the circumstances of the case the restrictive practice imposes an unreasonable restraint on competition.”
20 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.