Pro Sales, Inc. v. Texaco, U.S.A.’s Empirical Analysis
792 F.2d 1394 · 1986
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently April 2009 · most notably Lewy v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. (1986), Inland Bulk Transfer Co. v. Cummins Engine Co. (2003)
20 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 2802 · 15 U.S.C. § 2804 (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 2805 (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 2806 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Bell v. Hood · Hannahville Indian Community v. United States · United States v. McConney · Hazeltine Corp. v. RCA Corp. · Sun Valley Gasoline, Inc. v. Ernst Enterprises, 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“congressional plan would be frustrated by requiring a franchisee to go out of business before invoking the protections of the PMPA.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hilo v. Exxon Corporation · Hilo“promptly seek to invoke its rights under the PMPA.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“As used in this subchapter: (1)(A) The term “franchise” means any contract— (I) between a refiner and a distributor, (ii) between a refiner and a retailer, (iii) between a distributor and another distributor, or (iv) between a distributor and a retailer, under which a refiner or distributor (as the case may be) authorizes or permits a retailer or distributor to use, in connection with the sale, consignment, or distribution of motor fuel, a trademark which is owned or controlled by such refiner or by a refiner which supplies motor fuel to the distributor which authorizes or permits such use.”
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.