Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 637 F.2d 105 - Edward J. Sweeney & Sons, Inc. v. Texaco, Inc.

Edward J. Sweeney & Sons, Inc. v. Texaco, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

637 F.2d 105 · 1980

Citation profile

369
cited by 369 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
April 2022
most recently cited

174 federal appellate · 32 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 369 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2022 · most notably Monsanto Company v. Spray-Rite Service Corporation (1984), Truett Payne Company Inc v. Chrysler Motors Corporation (1981)

174 federal appellate · 32 district · 7 state decisions

245019801990200020102020decided

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 Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Brown Shoe Co. v. United States · Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United States · United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & 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 369 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “had a conscious commitment to a common scheme designed to achieve an unlawful objective.”
    39 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'unity of purpose or a common design and understanding or a meeting of the minds in an unlawful arrangement' must exist to trigger Section 1 liability.”
    18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]o permit the inference of concerted action on the basis of receiving complaints alone and thus to expose the defendant to treble damage liability would both inhibit management's exercise of independent business judgment and emasculate the terms of the statute.”
    8 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.