Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 103 F.2d 410 - Stenger v. Holmes

Stenger v. Holmes’s Empirical Analysis

103 F.2d 410 · 1939

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
November 2000
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 2000

1 federal appellate ·

2019391940195019601970198019902000decided

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 24 App. D.C. 462 - Paul v. Hess · 23 App. D.C. 526 - Hillard v. Brooks · 24 App. D.C. 282 - Lemp v. Mudge · Krueger v. Gautier

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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ * * * We cannot see why, if they were so satisfied, they laid it aside for more than fourteen months and devoted their activities to a solution of the same problem on a different invention.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.