Plummer v. Sargent’s Empirical Analysis
120 U.S. 442 · 1887
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 12 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2017 · most notably General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp. (1938), Abbott Laboratories v. Sandoz, Inc. (2009)
14 federal appellate · 12 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 Tucker v. Burditt · Tucker v. Dana
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“:What I claim ... is the new manufacture hereinabove described, consisting of iron ornamented in imitation of bronze by the application of oil and heat, substantially as described. 154 Id. at 445, 7 S.Ct. at 642. The prior art described iron that was bronzed by the”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“new article of manufacture called Tucker bronze.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It seems necessarily to follow from this view either that the Tucker patents are void by reason of anticipation practiced by Brocksieper, or that the patented process and product must be restricted to exactly what is described....”
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.