Tri-Crown Inc’s Empirical Analysis
908 F.2d 578 · 1990
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 30 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably Viqueira v. First Bank (1998), James v. United States (1992)
16 federal appellate · 30 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 12 U.S.C. § 1462 · 12 U.S.C. § 1464 (Consumer Home Mortgage Assistance Act of 1974) · 12 U.S.C. § 1972 · 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act)
Relies on Torres v. Oakland Scavenger Co. · Gooding v. United States · Bible Speaks, Inc. v. Dovydenas · Swanson v. Bixler · Morgan v. City of Rawlins
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“accept all the factual allegations as true and ... draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Nowhere does the legislative history or the language of the BHCA define the term ‘extension of credit.’ That term must be construed to accord with the underlying purpose of the anti-tying provisions. A particular practice should be considered an ‘extension of credit’ if it manifests the improper use of economic leverage that the Act seeks to prevent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The purpose of the specificity requirement of [Fed.R.App.P.] 3(c) is to provide notice both to the opposition and to the court of the identity of the appellant or appellants.... The specificity requirement of Rule 3(c) is met only by some designation that gives fair notice of the specific individual or entity seeking to appeal."”
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.