Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 196 F.2d 469 - Dalton v. Shakespeare Co.

Dalton v. Shakespeare Co.’s Empirical Analysis

196 F.2d 469 · 1952

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
March 1988
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1988

10 federal appellate · 3 district ·

1701952196019701980decided

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. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1400

Relies on Gulf Oil Corporation v. Gilbert · Neirbo Co. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. · Collett Kitpatrick v. Texas and Pacific Railway Co · Ex parte Schollenberger · Stonite Products Co. v. Melvin Lloyd 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““If Congress had intended the definition of Section 1391(c) to be limited to certain types of actions, congress would, we think, have plainly said so. If, on the contrary, congress had intended to provide that corporations are, for venue purposes, residents of those districts in which they are doing business, regardless of the particular wrong with which the corporation may be charged, it, by using the word ‘residence’ in Section 1391(c) and ‘resides’ in Section 1400(b), certainly took the right course to do so.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Any civil action for patent infringement may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business. June 25, 1948, c. 646, 62 Stat. 936 .””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.