Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 144 F.3d 229 - Graham v. James

Graham v. James’s Empirical Analysis

144 F.3d 229 · 1998

Citation profile

130
cited by 130 later decisions
2
states following
September 2021
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 14 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 130 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably Donald Terwilliger Jr v. Donald L Terwilliger III and John Terwilliger, Davis v. Blige (2007)

21 federal appellate · 14 district · 2 state decisions

5701998200020102020decided

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 Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid · Paddington Partners v. Bouchard · Schumacher v. Richards Shear Co. · Bf Goodrich

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

  1. “[a] copyright owner who grants a nonexclusive license to use his copyrighted material waives his right to sue the licensee for copyright infringement.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[the composer] expressly granted [the licensee] permission to play the song before payment was tendered or recognition received”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[E]ven assuming arguendo that the Miracle’s conduct constituted a material breach of the parties’ oral understanding, this fact alone would not render the Miracle’s playing of the song pursuant to [Albion’s] permission a violation of [Albion’s] copyright. Such a breach would do no more than entitle [Albion] to rescind the agreement and revoke [his] permission to play the song in the future, actions [he] did not take during the relevant period.”
    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.