Neumann v. Vidal’s Empirical Analysis
710 F.2d 856 · 1983
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 11 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently March 2014 · most notably Scott v. District of Columbia (1996), Whelan v. Abell (1992)
9 federal appellate · 11 district · 1 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. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 28 U.S.C. § 294
Relies on Japan Line, Ltd. v. County of Los Angeles · Henry S. Bloomgarden v. Charles B. Coyer · Konstantinidis v. C. N. Chen · Martin v. Phillips Petroleum Co. · Hecht v. Pro-Football, Inc.
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“were essentially designed 'to accomplish some end which the process was not intended by law to accomplish'--such as frightening off [the plaintiff's] investors or delaying his [293 U.S.App.D.C. 275] getting underway.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Whelan v. Abell
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.