Wawak & Co. v. Kaiser’s Empirical Analysis
129 F.2d 66 · 1942
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently December 1986
5 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 Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co. · Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Manufacturing Co. v. S. S. Kresge Co. · Straus v. Victor Talking Mach. Co. · Roseland v. Phister Mfg. Co. · Hedrick v. Perry
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We believe, however, that the evidence was sufficient to justify the master’s finding that plaintiff had sustained its burden and, in the absence of clear error on his part, the findings should be upheld. * * * If defendants made infringing sales to plaintiff’s list of customers, and plaintiff was selling the same goods to the same customers, and plaintiff was able and willing to make such infringing sales, it is only reasonable to conclude that plaintiff would have made such sales if there had not been such infringement. * * ” (Emphasis added.)”
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.