Simpson v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. ““The difficulty with the claim does not arise from want of novelty in the forms employed, nor yet in the want of novelty in the method of arranging these forms, because, simple as the arrangement is, the case furnishes no evidence that a scroll and roses were ever before arranged one above another, with only a bead between; but I find it difficult to consider that the scroll, roses, and bead, when arranged as described in-the claim, constitute a single ornament. There is no commingling of the lines forming the scroll, the bead, and the roses. Ho new idea seems to be embodied in the method of their arrangement. All that has been done is to place these distinct and well-known ornaments one above the other, without the production of any such combined effect as to entitle the whole to be treat as a new and original ornament. Ho new ornament has in fact been produced. ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dukes v. Bauerle

2. ““ Against this claim the only defense made is that the distinctive features of the newel-post described were to be found in other newel-posts prior to the date of the plaintiff's invention, and many of them, ,n fact, copied by the inventor himself from newel-posts erected in Hew York. But here the difficulty with the defense is that there is no evidence that any newel-post substantially similar in shape and configuration to the one described in the plaintiff’s patent had ever been designed. The arrangement of ornament and shape presented by the plaintiff’s post is new, useful, and original.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Anderson v. Saint