Cobb v. Lewis’s Empirical Analysis
488 F.2d 41 · 1974
Citation profile
109 federal appellate · 3 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 183 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2017 · most notably Mitsubishi Motors Corporation v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc (1985), Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co. (1982)
109 federal appellate · 3 district · 13 state decisions
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) · 15 U.S.C. § 14 (§ 3 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 77E (§ 5 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 785 · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 9 U.S.C. § 3
Relies on Wilko v. Swan · Baltimore Contractors, Inc. v. Bodinger · Enelow v. New York Life Insurance · Boesche v. Udall · Ettelson v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
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 183 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“courts of appeals have discretion, when the interests of substantive justice require it, to disregard irregularities in the form or procedure for filing a notice of appeal.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] claim under the antitrust laws is not merely a private matter. [Antitrust laws are] designed to promote the national interest in a competitive economy; thus the plaintiff asserting his rights under [those laws] has been likened to a private attorney-general who protects the public’s interest____ We do not believe that Congress intended such claims to be resolved elsewhere than in the courts.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'The rules ... were not adopted to set traps and pitfalls by way of technicalities for unwary litigants....' ... [T]he notice of appeal requirement may be satisfied by any statement, made either to the district court or to the Court of Appeals, that clearly evinces the party's intent to appeal.”
4 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.