Shaw Stocking Co. v. Mack’s Empirical Analysis
12 F. 707 · 1882
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 1977
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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 McLean v. Fleming · Manufacturing Co. v. Trainer · Holmes, Booth & Haydens v. Holmes, Booth & Atwood Manufacturing Co. · Colman v. . Crump · Gilman v. Hunnewell
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is not necessary that the resemblance produced should he such as would mislead an expert, nor such as would not be easily detected if the original and the spurious were seen together. It is enough that such similitmle exists as would lead an ordinary purchaser to suppose that he was buying the genuine article and not an imitation.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““A trade-mark may consist of a token, letter, sign, or seal. Names, ciphers, monograms, pictures, * * * may be used, and numerals united.””
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.