green
Positive treatment
2.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1968 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1968
1997
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited "but see"
Newberry v. Washington Post Co.
(3×)
But cf. Quinn v. Mobil Oil Co., 375 F.2d 273 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 389 U.S. 801 , 88 S.Ct. 8 , 19 L.Ed.2d 56 (1967). 10 When joined by the Post’s retaliatory price rise, the dealer contract imposed an illegal restraint on price closely analogous to instances in which the courts have condemned terminations in response to a *482 dealer’s departure from suggested prices.
discussed
Cited "see"
Wales Industrial Inc. v. Hasbro Bradley, Inc.
(2×)
See Uneeda Doll Co. v. Goldfarb Novelty Co., 373 F.2d 851, 853-54 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 801 , 88 S.Ct. 9 , 19 L.Ed.2d 56 (1967). 31 . 17 U.S.C. § 401 (b), (c); 37 C.F.R. § 201.20 (c), (i)(2); see Uneeda Doll Co., 373 F.2d at 853-54 ; Boucher v. DuBoyes, Inc., 253 F.2d 948 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 357 U.S. 936 , 78 S.Ct. 1384 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1550 (1958); Scarves by Vera, Inc. v. United Merchants & Mfgs., Inc., 173 F.Supp. 625 (S.D.N.Y.1959). 32 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Dave Grossman Designs, Inc. v. Bortin
(2×)
See, Uneeda Doll Co. v. Goldfarb Novelty Company, 373 F.2d 851, 854 (2d Cir. 1967), cert. dismissed 389 U.S. 801 , 88 S.Ct. 9 , 19 L.Ed.2d 56 (1967); Dan Kasoff, Inc. v. Novelty Jewelry Co., 309 F.2d 745 (2d Cir. 1962).
discussed
Cited "see"
Decca Records v. Musicor Records
(2×)
See Uneeda Doll Co. v. Goldfarb Novelty Co., 373 F.2d 851 , 852 n. 1 (2d Cir.), cert. dismissed, 389 U.S. 801 , 88 S.Ct. 9 , 19 L.Ed.2d 56 (1967) ; Rushton v. Vitale, 218 F.2d 434 (2d Cir. 1955).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sunset Lamp Corp. v. Alsy Corp.
(2×)
See also, Uneeda Doll Co. v. Goldfarb Novelty Co., 373 F.2d 851, 854 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 389 U.S. 801 , 88 S.Ct. 9 , 19 L.Ed.2d 56 (1967); Dan Kasoff, Inc. v. Novelty Jewelry Co., 309 F.2d 745 (2d Cir.1962).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
State of Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society, an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation Maricopa Foundation for Medical Care, an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation Pima County Medical Society, an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation and Pima Foundation for Medical Care, an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation, State of Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society, an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation Maricopa Foundation for Medical Care, an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation and Pima Foundation for Medical Care, an Arizona Non-Profit Corporation
(3×)
Seagram & Sons, 340 U.S. 211 , 71 S.Ct. 259 , 95 L.Ed. 219 (1951); see also Quinn v. Mobil Oil Co., 375 F.2d 273 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 389 U.S. 801 , 88 S.Ct. 8 , 19 L.Ed.2d 56 (1967).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society
(3×)
Seagram & Sons, 340 U.S. 211 , 71 S.Ct. 259 , 95 L.Ed. 219 (1951); see also Quinn v. Mobil Oil Co., 375 F.2d 273 (1st Cir.), cert. dismissed, 389 U.S. 801 , 88 S.Ct. 8 , 19 L.Ed.2d 56 (1967).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Quinn
v.
Mobil Oil Co., a Division of Socony Mobil Oil Co., Inc.
v.
Mobil Oil Co., a Division of Socony Mobil Oil Co., Inc.
No. 159.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jul 28, 1967.
Gonmd W. Oberdorfer for respondent.
Cited by 37 opinions | Published
C. A. 1st Cir. Petition for writ of certiorari dismissed July 28, 1967, pursuant to Rule 60 of the Rules of this Court.