Planing-Machine Company v. Keith’s Empirical Analysis
101 U.S. 479 · 1879
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2002 · most notably Corona Cord Tire Co. v. Dovan Chemical Corp. (1928), Pennsylvania Co v. Locomotive Engine Safety Truck Co (1884)
30 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 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
Relies on Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co. · Kendall v. Winsor · Joseph Shaw v. Joseph Cooper · Roemer v. Simon
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It may bo admitted it would be too weak lor general planing work upon boards or plank. It is comparatively a, small machine. It would not cease to be the same machine, in principle, if any one or all of its constituents were enlarged and strengthened, so that it might perform heavier work.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““And it is not perceived why, if enlarged, it would not answer all the purposes of the Woodbury machine. Mere enlargement is not invention. The simplest mechanic can make such modification.””
1 later decision 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.