Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 550 F.2d 860 - Link v. Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc.

Link v. Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

550 F.2d 860 · 1977

Citation profile

114
cited by 114 later decisions
8
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

47 federal appellate · 9 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 114 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Bogosian v. Gulf Oil Corp. (1977), Green v. Obledo (1981)

47 federal appellate · 9 district · 9 state decisions

440197719801990200020102020decided

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. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 16 (§ 5 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 26 (§ 16 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292

Relies on Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin · Sierra Club v. Morton · Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Hagans v. Lavine

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 114 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a practical problem, and primarily a factual one with which a district court generally has a greater familiarity and expertise than does a court of appeals. Consequently, it is an area in which the trial court must of necessity be granted a wide range of discretion.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(b) When a district judge, in making in a civil action an order not otherwise appeal-able under this section, shall be of the opinion that such order involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation, he shall so state in writing in such order.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “When a district judge, in making in a civil action an order not otherwise appealable under this section, shall be of the opinion that such order involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation, he shall so state in writing in such order.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.