Abrams v. Interco Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 2000
1 federal appellate ·
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. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914)
Relies on In re Independent Gasoline Antitrust Litigation · Kendler v. Federated Department Stores, 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]lthough it would be reasonable to construe the allegations about suggested price lists as claiming conduct by Interco affecting all its dealers in common, this allegation is barely a start at making out the alleged claim of antitrust violation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“some pattern of conduct on Interco's part which was reasonably consistent, affecting all or most of the dealers referred to in the complaint”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“raise[d] issues relating to Interco's individual relationships with each of its thousands of dealers”
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.