Electric Auto-lite Co. v. P. & D, Mfg. Co.’s Empirical Analysis
109 F.2d 566 · 1940
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently February 1993
10 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Wilson v. Simpson · Crescent Tool Co. v. Kilborn & Bishop Co. · Heyer v. Duplicator Manufacturing Co. · Cheney Bros. v. Doris Silk Corp. · Electric Auto-Lite Co. v. P. & D. Mfg. Co.
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There is nothing unlawful in copying the unpatented products of another dealer down to the last detail, except in so far as the resulting similarity may become a means of securing his customers through their belief, so induced, that your goods are his.”
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.