Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 191 U.S. 427 - La Republique Francaise v. Saratoga Vichy Spring Company

La Republique Francaise v. Saratoga Vichy Spring Company’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
13
states following
October 1998
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 4 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1998 · most notably County of Oneida New York v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York State New York (1985), 457 F. Supp. 1090 - Cuban Cigar Brands N. v. v. Upmann International, Inc. (1978)

1 federal appellate · 4 district · 18 state decisions — followed in 13 states

1001900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Menendez v. Holt · McLean v. Fleming · Elgin National Watch Company v. Illinois Watch Case Company W · Saxlehner v. Eisner & Mendelson Co. · United States v. Beebe

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

  1. ““Time the name is geographical; but geographical names often acquire a secondary signification indicative not only of the place of manufacture or production, but of the name of the manufacturer or producer and the excellence of the thing manufactured or produced, which enables the owner to assert an exclusive right to such name as against every one not doing business within the same geographical limits; and even as against them, if the name be used fraudulently for the purpose of misleading buyers as to the actual origin 'of the thing produced, or of palming off the productions of one person as those of another.””
    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.