Zimmers v. Dodge Bros.’s Empirical Analysis
21 F.2d 152 · 1927
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 2001
7 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 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 Eastman Kodak Co of New York v. Southern Photo Materials Co · Cannon Mfg Co v. Cudahy Packing Co · International Harvester Company of America v. Commonwealth of Kentucky · Green v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. · Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co. v. McKibbin
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““What constitutes ‘doing business’ within the district, within Judicial Code, § 48 (Comp.St. § 1030), relating to jurisdiction and service of process in suits for infringement of patents, depends on facts of the particular case, in view of section 24 (Comp. St. § 991), Anti-Trust Act, § 7 (Comp. St. § 8829 [ 15 U.S.C.A. § 15 ]), and Clayton Act, § 12 (Comp.St. § 8835k [ 15 U.S.C.A. § 22 ]).””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Where it is doubtful whether foreign corporation is doing business within the district, so as to give federal District Court jurisdiction of patent infringement suit against it under Judicial Code, § 48 (Comp.St. § 1030), it is better that parties be remitted to the district where there is no doubt as to jurisdiction before expensive and protracted litigation has been had.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Should we spell out the strongest possible case to support the jurisdiction under the facts here presented, the most that we could say is that it is extremely doubtful. ‘In this situation, it is better that the parties be remitted to the district where there is no doubt as to the jurisdiction, before, rather than after, expensive and protracted litigation has been had.’””
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.