ABBOTT LABORATORIES Et Al. v. GARDNER, SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, Et Al.

1967-05-22 · Supreme Court of the United States · United States

read the judgment

6What it rests on

4Relied on since

0Departed from

Relied on since

The judgments that cite this one. This is the answer that tells you the case is still alive.

19702 judgments14 years silent19841 judgments42 years silent20261 judgments

4 judgments have relied on it, across 1970–2026

first 1970 · last 2026 · busiest 1970 (2 judgments)

2026-06-19Heritage Foundation v. U.S. Department of JusticeDistrict Court, District of Columbia 1984-06-04BLOCK, SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE, Et Al. v. COMMUNITY NUTRITION INSTITUTE Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1970-03-09BARLOW Et Al. v. COLLINS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL STABILIZATION AND CONSERVATION SERVICE, Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1970-03-03ASSOCIATION OF DATA PROCESSING SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS, INC., Et Al. v. CAMP, COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY, Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States

What it rests on

1944-02-28STARK ET AL. v. WICKARD, SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE, Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1942-06-01COLUMBIA BROADCASTING SYSTEM, INC. v. UNITED STATES Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1942-04-06Scripps-Howard Radio, Inc. v. Federal Communications CommissionSupreme Court of the United States 1940-04-29PERKINS, SECRETARY OF LABOR, Et Al. v. LUKENS STEEL CO. Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States 1938-12-05SHIELDS Et Al. v. UTAH IDAHO CENTRAL RAILROAD CO.Supreme Court of the United States 1923-06-11Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, Et Al.; Frothingham v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States

13 point outside the corpus. Read from the text, but no judgment held here answers to them. They are counted rather than hidden: this corpus is a slice, not the law.

Departed from

No judgment recorded a departure from this one.

Departure is not detected yet, and the gap is deliberate. Searching for the words the Court might use was measured on 1,019 judgments: "depart from" appears 100 times and most often means departing from the facts found by a domestic court; "overruled" appears 44 times, usually about a domestic judgment; "abandon" appears 123 times, most often as abandoned firearms. Tightened to require the Court itself as the subject, precision was still around 40%, the rest being a dissenting judge complaining, or a national supreme court departing from its own case-law. Telling a lawyer an authority is dead when it is alive is worse than saying nothing, so nothing is what this says until each candidate can be judged properly.

not characterised

Most citations carry no word at all. The Court does not always say what it is doing when it cites one of its own judgments, and where it stayed silent nothing is inferred here.