3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 9 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Champagne Metals v. Ken-Mac Metals, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Champagne Metals v. Ken-Mac Metals, Inc. Anchor | green | “requires courts to conduct a fact-specific assessment of market power and market structure to assess the restraint's actual effect on competition.” | 3 |
| 2 | United States v. Kemp & Assocs., Inc. | green | “while the text of the sherman act could perhaps be interpreted to proscribe all contracts, the supreme court has repeated time and again that 1 outlaws only unreasonable restraints of trade.” | 3 |
| 3 | Llacua v. Western Range Association | green | “mere allegations of parallel conduct, absent additional contextual facts, fail to state a plausible conspiracy claim.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.