Peters v. Hanger’s Empirical Analysis
134 F. 586 · 1904
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 1994
7 federal appellate · 3 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 The Harrisburg · Davis v. Mills · Bartlett v. Manor · Lambert v. Ensign Manuf'g Co. · Taylor v. Cranberry Iron & Coal Co.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“this [six-year] restriction [on the statutory right of recovery] is not subject to the disabilities and excuses through which ordinary statutes of limitation may be avoided”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“limits the recovery of profits and damages to those arising from infringements committed within six years prior to the institution of suit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“qualification or condition upon a right of recovery,”
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.