Wade v. Metcalf’s Empirical Analysis
129 U.S. 202 · 1889
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 11 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1985 · most notably General Talking Pictures Corporation v. Western Electric Co (1938), Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. City of San Francisco (1924)
11 federal appellate · 11 district · 5 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 Birdsell v. Shaliol · Adams v. Burke · Kendall v. Winsor · Bloomer v. McQuewan · William McClurg v. Lawrence Kingsland
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Every person wlio purchases of the inventor or discoverer, or with his knowledge and consent constructs any newly invented or discovered machine, or other patentable article, prior to the application by the inventor or discoverer for a patent, or who sells or uses one so constructed, shall have the right to use, and vend to others to be used, the specific thing so made or purchased, without liability therefor.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““First. Every person who ‘purchases of the inventor’ the machine before his application for a patent. “Second. Every person who ‘with his knowledge and consent constructs’ the machine before the application. “Third. Every person ‘who sells’ a machine ‘so constructed,’ that is to say, which has been constructed with the knowledge and consent of the inventor by another i>erson. ‘‘¡Fourth. Ifivery person who ‘uses one so constructed,’ that is to say, constructed with the inventor’s knowledge and consent by another person.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘‘Under Hoy. St. § 4899 (U. S. Comp. St. 1001, p. 3387), a specific patentable machine. constructed with the knowledge and consent of the inventor, before Ms application for a patent, is set free from tile monopoly of the patent in the hands of every one: and therefore, if constructed with the inventor’s knowledge and consent, before Ms application for a patent, by a partnership of which he is a member, it may be used by his copartners after the dissolution of tile partnership, although the agreement of dissolution provides that nothing therein contained shall operate as an assent to such use, or shall lesson or impair any rights which they may have to such use.””
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.