Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 118 N.Y. 30 - Tabor v. . Hoffman

Tabor v. . Hoffman’s Empirical Analysis

1889

Citation profile

143
cited by 143 later decisions
15
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 12 district · 64 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 143 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co. (1911), Hyde Corporation v. Huffines (1958)

34 federal appellate · 12 district · 64 state decisions — followed in 15 states

43018891890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Peabody v. Norfolk · Palmer v. . De Witt · Rees v. Peltzer · Hammer v. Barnes

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

  1. ““If a valuable medicine not protected by patent is put upon the market any one may, if he can by chemical analysis and a series of experiments or by any other use of the medicine itself aided by his own resources, discover the Ingredients and their proportions. If he thus finds out the secret of the proprietor he may use it to any extent that he desires without any danger of interference by the courts. But because this discovery may be possible by fair means, it would not justify a discovery by unfair means, such as the bribery of a clerk who in the course of his employment has aided in compounding the medicine and had thus become familiar with the formula. The courts-have frequently restrained persons, who have learned a secret formula for •compounding medicines, beverages and the like, while in the employment of the proprietor, from using it themselves or imparting it to others, to his injury.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “* * * Even if resort to the patterns [plans] of the plaintiff was more of a convenience than a necessity, still, if there was a secret, it belonged to him, and the defendant had no right to obtain it by unfair means or to use it after it was thus obtained.”
    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.