Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 124 F.1d 521 - Julius King Optical Co. v. Bilhoefer

Julius King Optical Co. v. Bilhoefer’s Empirical Analysis

124 F. 521 · 1903

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
December 1903
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Relies on Union Paper-Bag Machine Company v. Murphy · Hoyt v. Horne · Kellam v. Keith

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

  1. ““In an eyeglass, the combination, with lenses, of posts or standards secured thereto, nose pads secured to said posts or standards and adapted to grip the nose, and other nose pads rigidly secured to said standards above and to the rear of the nose pads first named, and also adapted to grip the n.>se, substantially as specified.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““By my invention I provide an eyeglass which is adapted to grasp the fleshy portion of the nose by pads which are rigidly secured and prevent any swiveling or rocking movement, and also other pads adapted to grasp the cartilaginous portion of the nose and to act as steadimonts.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““It is evident that these pads are intended to grasp the nose at least at two different points, one of which points is in the rear of the other and higher up; the purpose being to prevent any swiveling or rocking movement of the glasses.””
    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.