Blue Dane Simmental Corp. v. American Simmental Ass'n’s Empirical Analysis
178 F.3d 1035 · 1999
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Lauzon v. Senco Products, Inc. (2001), Pizza Hut, Inc. v. Papa John's International, Inc. (2000)
20 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 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 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Kumho Tire Company, Ltd., et al. v. Patrick Carmichael, Etc., et al. · Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc · General Electric Co. v. Joiner · Brunswick Corporation v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“of expert testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, the district court must look to both the relevancy and the reliability of the testimony”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) that the defendant made a false statement of fact about its product in a commercial advertisement; (2) that the statement actually deceived or has a tendency to deceive a substantial segment of its audience; (3) the deception is likely to influence the purchasing decision; (4) the defendant caused the false statement to enter interstate commerce; and (5) the plaintiffl ] ha[s] been or [is] likely to injured as a result.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Lanham Act permits the district court to award attorney’s fees to the prevailing party in exceptional cases. 15 U.S.C. § 1117 . When a plaintiffs case is groundless, unreasonable, vexatious, or pursued in bad faith, it is exceptional, and the district court may award attorney’s fees to the defendant.”
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.