United States v. Ten Cases’s Empirical Analysis
49 F.2d 87 · 1931
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently October 1974
10 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 21 U.S.C. § 1
Relies on Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co. · Langnes v. Green · United States of America v. Lexington Mill & Elevator Company · Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Co. v. United States · Four Hundred and Forty-Three Cans of Frozen Egg Product v. United States of America
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There was no proof that Bred Spred contained any damaged or any harmful or deleterious substance. The word `inferiority' in the statute raises the question, What is the other member of the comparison? Or, in other words, the question, Inferior to what? * * * The mere fact that the product contained fewer strawberries than some other product, e. g., jam, does not * * * show that a comparison with jam was called for by the statute unless Bred Spred was being palmed off on the public as jam. No showing of this kind was made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“an article shall be deemed to be adulterated. * * * In the case of food * * * If it be mixed, colored, powdered, coated, or stained in a manner whereby damage or inferiority is concealed”
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.