Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 704 F.2d 125 - Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Mid-Atlantic Toyota Distributors, Inc.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Mid-Atlantic Toyota Distributors, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

704 F.2d 125 · 1983

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
October 2024
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 4 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2024 · most notably Kansas v. UtiliCorp United Inc. (1990), In re Oil Spill by the Amoco Cadiz off the Coast of France on March 16, 1978 (1992)

8 federal appellate · 4 district · 9 state decisions

13019831990200020102020decided

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. § 15C · 15 U.S.C. § 15E (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 15G (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 15H (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 26 (§ 16 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 28 U.S.C. § 1292

Relies on Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois · Reiter v. Sonotone Corp. · Hawaii v. Standard Oil Co. of Cal. · 11 Cal. 3d 1 - D'AMICO v. Board of Medical Examiners

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

  1. “Any Attorney General of a State may bring a civil action in the name of such State, as parens patriae on behalf of natural persons residing in such state in any district court of the United States having jurisdiction of the defendant, to secure monetary relief as provided in this section for injury sustained by such natural persons to their property by reason of any violation of sections 1 to 7 of this title ...”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “While the language differs, each provision allocates to the attorney general power and authority to represent the jurisdiction and its interests in litigation. In at least two ways, we find the present actions to fall clearly within the ambit of each of the attorneys general's state-derived authority.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[N]o state has a legitimate quasi-sovereign interest in seeing that consumers or any other group of persons receive a given sum of money.”
    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.