Wabash Corp. v. Ross Electric Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
187 F.2d 577 · 1951
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently May 1995 · most notably National Labor Relations Board v. Universal Camera Corp. (1951), United States v. Masiello (1956)
25 federal appellate · 3 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
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 32
Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co. · Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp. · Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co. · Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If ... the witness testified orally (i.e., in the trial judge’s presence) then the trial judge’s “testimonial” or “primary” inference must usually be accepted by the upper court. That is the usual rule because of the importance attached to the witnesses’ demeanor in estimating credibility; the demeanor is regarded as a sort of “real evidence.” Absent documentary evidence ... his discretion in making “testimonial” or “primary” inferences is virtually unre-viewable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Absent documentary evidence ... his discretion in making”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“the demeanor is regarded as a sort of 'real evidence.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.