Brewer v. Uniroyal, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
498 F.2d 973 · 1974
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably Russ' Kwik Car Wash, Inc. v. Marathon Petroleum Co. (1985), Carter v. District of Columbia (1986)
38 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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. § 13 (§ 2 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914)
Relies on Dimick v. Schiedt · Kiefer-Stewart Co. v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc. · Gotthelf v. Commissioner · Goss v. Board of Education · Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. United States
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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“test for determining whether a transfer to a subsidiary constitutes a sale: 22 We agree that a sales subsidiary could be found to be independent of its parent and thus be considered a”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he District Court must offer the party awarded damages the choice of a new trial or the amount of the Court's remittitur.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce to pay or contract for the payment of anything of value to or for the benefit of a customer of such person in the course of such commerce as compensation or in consideration for any services or facilities furnished by or through such customer in connection with the processing, handling, sale, or offering for sale of any products or commodities manufactured, sold, or offered for sale by such person, unless such payment or consideration is available on proportionally equal terms to all other customers competing in the distribution of such products or commodities.”
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.