Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 191 F.2d 108 - Creamette Co. v. Conlin

Creamette Co. v. Conlin’s Empirical Analysis

191 F.2d 108 · 1951

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
September 1989
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently September 1989

14 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

701951196019701980decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 1051 (§ 1 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))

Relies on Hanover Star Milling Co. v. Metcalf · Sunbeam Lighting Co. v. Sunbeam Corp. · Arrow Distilleries, Inc. v. Globe Brewing Co. · Taylor v. Payne · Philco Corp. v. F. & B. Mfg. 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Our examination of the Florida authorities discloses that the law of that State applicable to claims of, and protection from, unfair competition are to the same effect as those prevailing in American jurisprudence generally. This is illustrated by an examination of the cases cited with approval by the Florida Supreme Court in Lumberman's Mutual Casualty Co. v. Lumber Mutual Casualty Ins. Co. of New York, 154 Fla. 367, 17 So.2d 615. It appears from consideration of the authorities that there is not so much dispute and difference as to the fundamental law, as there is in the application, which the courts make in particular cases, to the facts then being considered.”
    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.