Kendall-Jackson Winery, Ltd. v. Branson’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 27 U.S.C. § 122 (Webb-Kenyon Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1292
Relies on Younger v. Harris · Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · Burford v. Sun Oil Co.
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Unquestionably, the state interests served by a strong local distributorship network are substantial, and a judgment by the Illinois legislature that that interest is best-served by prohibiting termination of distributorships except for good cause is beyond challenge.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“fair, efficient, and competitive distribution of [alcoholic] beverages.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“in which to rectify any claimed deficiency.”
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.