green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
5.5 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1987 ·
…to impose upon plaintiff the additional expenses of developing another site ... is clearly to extract a monopolist's advantage.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1954 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1954
1990
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Illinois Ex Rel. Hartigan v. Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co.
to impose upon plaintiff the additional expense of developing another site ... is clearly to extract a monopolist's advantage.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Marvin L. Fishman and Illinois Basketball, Inc. v. Estate of Arthur M. Wirtz, and Illinois Basketball, Inc. v. Estate of Arthur M. Wirtz
(2×)
to impose upon plaintiff the additional expenses of developing another site ... is clearly to extract a monopolist's advantage.
discussed
Cited "see"
William Rothenberg v. Lincoln Farm Camp, Inc.
See Olsen v. Arabian American Oil Co., 194 F.2d 477, 478 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 344 U.S. 817 , 73 S.Ct. 12 , 97 L.Ed. 636 (1952); Reiss v. Arabian American Oil Co., 279 A.D. 805 , 109 N.Y.S.2d 625, 626 (2d Dep’t 1952).
cited
Cited "see"
Don Sabin v. Earl H. Butz, Secretary of Agriculture, and Edward P. Cliff, Chief, U. S. Forest Service
See Gamco, Inc. v. Providence Fruit & Produce Bldg., 194 F.2d 484, 487 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 344 U.S. 817 , 73 S.Ct. 11 , 97 L.Ed. 636 ; United States v. Terminal Railroad Ass’n of St.
cited
Cited "see"
Cecil Corley Motor Co., Inc. v. General Motors Corp.
See, Transit Advertisers Inc. v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad, 194 F.2d 907, 911-912 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 344 U.S. 817 , 73 S.Ct. 11 , 97 L.Ed. 636 (1952).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Natural Design, Inc. v. Rouse Co.
See also Gamco, Inc. v. Providence Fruit & Produce Building, Inc., 194 F.2d 484 (1st Cir.), cert. denied 344 U.S. 817 , 73 S.Ct. 11 , 97 L.Ed. 636 (1952).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co.
v.
Transit Advertisers, Inc.
v.
Transit Advertisers, Inc.
No. 59.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 13, 1952.
Edward R. Brumley for petitioner., J. Edward Lumbard, Jr. for respondent.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: Seventh Circuit (2) · C.D. Illinois (1)
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.