Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 213 F.1d 871 - Cooper v. James

Cooper v. James’s Empirical Analysis

213 F. 871 · 1914

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
January 1994
most recently cited

1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1994

1 district ·

20191419201930194019501960197019801990decided

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.

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

  1. “The musical composition contemplated by the statute must, doubtless, be substantially a new and original work, and not a copy of a piece already produced, with additions and variations, which a writer of music with experience and skill might readily make.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “can hardly be said to be an original composition.”
    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.