Vermont Food Industries, Inc. v. Ralston Purina Co.’s Empirical Analysis
514 F.2d 456 · 1975
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 2014
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 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 Keeble v. United States · Blessington v. McCrory Stores Corp. · Frank R. Jelleff, Inc. v. Braden · Fortunato v. Ford Motor Co. · Bean v. Sears, Roebuck & Company
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“none of these questions was probative of the real point the appellant was trying to get before the jury, namely, that no complaints concerning the appellant’s product had in fact been made. Many complaints might have been made locally, but resolved there. In other words, the absence of formal complaints at the home office might not be indicative of the situation in the field.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. AZ v. Shinseki“In the very nature of things no direct proof of the cause of the trouble can be given. Direct proof is not necessary. Circumstantial evidence may be resorted to, and such evidence will be sufficient to justify the verdict below, if there can be drawn therefrom a rational inference that the [defendants’ product] was the source of the trouble.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hall v. Miller
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.