Edward C. Rea and 22 Ford Inc., a Corporation v. Ford Motor Company, a Corporation’s Empirical Analysis
497 F.2d 577 · 1974
Citation profile
62 federal appellate · 10 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 128 later decisions — most recently August 2006 · most notably 318 Pa. Super. 90 - Delahanty v. First Pennsylvania Bank, N.A. (1984), Mid-West Paper Products Company 78-1736 v. Continental Group Inc Shopping Cart Inc 78-1746 (1979)
62 federal appellate · 10 district · 6 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
Relies on Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc. · Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co. · American Tobacco Co. v. United States · Eastman Kodak Co of New York v. Southern Photo Materials 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 128 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(W)hether a manufacturer has acted with sufficient justification to constitute good faith in bringing pressure to bear on a dealer is a factual question the determination of which will depend on the circumstances arising in each particular case.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““the duty of each party to any franchise, and all officers, employees, or agents thereof to act in a fair and equitable manner toward each other so as to guar-' antee the one party freedom from coercion, intimidation, or threats of coercion or intimidation from the other party: Provided, That recommendation, endorsement, exposition, persuasion, urging or argument shall not be deemed to constitute a lack of good faith.” 15 U.S.C. § 1221 (e).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is well established that a person seeking to recover treble damages under Section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15 , cannot prevail merely by proof that the defendant has violated the antitrust laws. In addition, he must prove that the violation was a material cause of some injury to his business or property. See Deaktor v. Fox Grocery Co., 475 F.2d 1112, 1115 (3d Cir. 1973) ....”
2 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.