National Basketball Ass'n v. SDC Basketball Club, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
815 F.2d 562 · 1987
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently November 2013 · most notably Central Montana Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. v. Administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration (1988), Seattle Audubon Society v. Moseley (1996)
24 federal appellate · 5 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
Relies on Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co. · Association of National Advertisers, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission · Ashton v. Cory · T.W. Electrical Service, Inc. v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Ass'n
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the facts alleged, under all the circumstances, show that there is a substantial controversy, between parties having adverse legal interests, of sufficient immediacy and reality to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he issue is not whether the requested declaratory relief is hypothetical. Rather, the issue is whether the case presents a sufficiently concrete case and controversy upon which relief properly may be fashioned.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The NBA’s claims meet the requirements of the test. The [parties’] alternative formulation of case and controversy would force the NBA to impose a fine or sanction on the Clippers before an action could accrue. This is the type of Damoclean threat that the Declaratory Judgment Act is designed to avoid. Since the NBA’s “real and reasonable apprehension,” was that any action on the Clippers’ move could result in antitrust liability, the case is justiciable.”
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.