Hamro v. Shell Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis
674 F.2d 784 · 1982
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably Klamath-Lake Pharmaceutical Ass'n v. Klamath Medical Service Bureau (1983), Jack Walters & Sons Corp. v. Morton Building, Inc. (1984)
15 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 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. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 14 (§ 3 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914)
Relies on Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United States · Times-Picayune Pub Co v. United States · Piper v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc. · Neil v. Biggers
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“failed to offer any evidence from which a reasonable person could conclude that [plaintiff] was in competition with Shell’s more favored customers.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The franchised outlets serve merely as conduits through which the trademarked goods of the franchisor flow to the ultimate consumer.”
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.