Barr Laboratories, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories’s Empirical Analysis
978 F.3d 98 · 1992
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 17 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably United States of America, v. Microsoft Corporation, (2001), In the Matter of Rhone-Poulenc Rorer Incorporated (1995)
34 federal appellate · 17 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 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 13 (§ 2 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 14 (§ 3 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 2 (§ 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 26 (§ 16 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Relies on Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Brunswick Corporation v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat Inc · United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. · United States v. Philadelphia National Bank · Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line 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 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is necessary to weigh the probable effect of the contract on the relevant area of effective competition, taking into account the relative strength of the parties, the proportionate volume of commerce involved in relation to the total volume of commerce in the relevant market area, and the probable immediate and future effects which pre-emption of that share of the market might have on effective competition therein.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“in furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice, or when separate trials will be conducive to expedition and economy....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A]lthough the size of a defendant’s market share is a significant determinant of whether a defendant has a dangerous probability of successfully monopolizing the relevant market, it is not exclusive. Other factors to be considered include the strength of competition, probable de velopment of the industry, the barriers to entry, the nature of the anti-competitive conduct, and the elasticity of consumer demand.”
2 later decisions 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.