Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 132 U.S. 39 - Brush v. Condit

Brush v. Condit’s Empirical Analysis

132 U.S. 39 · 1889

Citation profile

143
cited by 143 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
July 1989
most recently cited

72 federal appellate · 37 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 143 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1989 · most notably Light v. United States (1911), Monroe Auto Equipment Co. v. Heckethorn Manufacturing & Supply Co. (1964)

72 federal appellate · 37 district ·

24018891890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Coffin v. Ogden · Pickering v. McCullough · Hall v. Macneale · Radford v. Folsom

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

  1. ““The case is that of the public, well-known, practical use in ordinary work, with as much) success as was reasonable to expect at that stage in the development of the mechanism belonging to electric arc lighting, of the exact invention which was subsequently made by the patentee; and, although only one clamp and one lamp were ever made, which were used together two and one half months only, and the invention was then taken from the lamp and was not afterwards used with carbon pencils, it was an anticipation of the patented device, under the established rules upon the subject.””
    2 later decisions 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.