Kustoff v. Chaplin’s Empirical Analysis
120 F.2d 551 · 1941
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently July 1984 · most notably Arnstein v. Porter (1946), Litchfield v. Spielberg (1984)
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 White-Smith Music Publishing Company v. Apollo Company · Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp. · Dymow v. Bolton · Perris v. Hexamer · King Features Syndicate v. Fleischer
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In order to prove infringement there must have been copying of a substantial portion of the copyrighted work. Such copying is essential to recovery in an action for infringement of a copyright.” Kustoff v. Chaplin, 9 Cir., 120 F.2d 551, 560 . “Of course, with a common source, two dramatizations must have much in common.” Klein v. Beach, D.C., 232 F. 240 -47; Id., 2 Cir., 239 F. 108 .”
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.