Roe-Lawton v. Hal E. Roach Studios’s Empirical Analysis
18 F.2d 126 · 1927
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently December 1955
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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 Dymow v. Bolton · Stephens v. Howells Sales Co. · Bachman v. Belasco
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Unless the public is deceived by the pictures, and led to believe that the films are a picturization of plaintiff’s literary work (the standard of the ordinary observer being applied) then no infringement is shown.””
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.