Washburn Moen Manuf'G Co v. Beat 'Em All Barbed-Wire Co’s Empirical Analysis
143 U.S. 275 · 1892
Citation profile
542 federal appellate · 250 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,475 later decisions (36 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2023 · most notably Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co. (1923), Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Ray-O-Vac Co. (1944)
542 federal appellate · 250 district · 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 Loom Company v. Higgins · Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co. · Cantrell v. Wallick · Coffin v. Ogden
Cited together with Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co. · Deering v. Winona Harvester Works · Loom Company v. Higgins · Diamond Rubber Company of New York v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Company · Coffin v. Ogden
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 1,475 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In view of the unsatisfactory character of such testimony, arising from the forgetfulness of witnesses, their liability to mistakes, their proneness to recollect things as the party calling them would have them recollect them, aside from the temptation to actual perjury, courts have not only imposed upon defendants the burden of proving such devices, but have required that the proof shall be clear, satisfactory and beyond a reasonable doubt. Witnesses whose memories are prodded by the eagerness of interested parties to elicit testimony favorable to themselves are not usually to be depended upon for accurate information.”
44 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]n the law of patents it is the last step that wins.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Watson v. Stevens · Sayre v. Scott““Richardson's invention brought to success what prior inventions had essayed, and partly accomplished. Ho used some things which had been used before, but he added just that which was necessary to make the whole a practically valuable and economical apparatus. The facts that the known valves were not used, and Hie speedy and extensive adoption of Richardson’s valve, aro facts in harmony with tlie evidence that Ms valve contains just what the prior valves lack, and go to support the conclusion at which we have arrived on the question of novelty.””
3 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.