Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 138 FSUPP 887 - Ross v. Plastic Playthings, Inc.

Ross v. Plastic Playthings, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1956

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
August 1986
most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 35 U.S.C. § 289

Relies on Root v. Railway Co. · Caffey v. Bereslavsky · Bereslavsky v. Caffey · Spiro v. Pennsylvania R. Co. · McKnight v. Mutual Broadcasting System, Inc.

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

  1. “[t]he [district] judge erred in striking the jury demand, despite the fact that more than ten days had elapsed from the service of the last pleading directed to the issues as made by the original complaint and amended answer. For, under that complaint, the plaintiff was not entitled to demand a jury, since the relief he then sought was exclusively “in equity,” so that there was then no “issue triable as of right by a jury.” When, by amending his complaint, he abandoned his prayer for such equitable relief, he then, for the first time, was in a position to demand a jury, for only then did there come into being an issue “triable as of right by a jury.” He made this demand well within ten days thereafter.”
    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.