McGlinchy v. Shell Chemical Co.’s Empirical Analysis
845 F.2d 802 · 1988
Citation profile
113 federal appellate · 72 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 350 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Moore v. Kayport Package Express, Inc. (1989), Ascon Properties, Inc. v. Mobil Oil Co. (1989)
113 federal appellate · 72 district · 6 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. § 2 (§ 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 6A (Sherman Antitrust Act)
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Conley v. Gibson · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Foman v. Davis
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 350 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a plaintiff must demonstrate three elements: (1) an agreement, conspiracy, or combination among two or more persons or distinct business entities; (2) which is intended to harm or unreasonably restrain competition; and (3) which actually causes injury to competition, beyond the impact on the claimant, within a field of commerce in which the claimant is engaged (i.e., 'antitrust injury').”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“To establish a section 2 violation for an attempt to monopolize, a plaintiff must demonstrate four elements: (1) specific intent to control prices or destroy competition; (2) predatory or anti-competitive conduct directed toward accomplishing that purpose; (3) a dangerous probability of success; and (4) causal antitrust injury.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“leave [to amend a pleading] shall be freely given when justice so requires,”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.