Mark Jacobs v. Joseph Beecham’s Empirical Analysis
221 U.S. 263 · 1911
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 33 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 121 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2009 · most notably Prestonettes, Inc. v. Coty (1924), Waterman Company v. Modern Pen Company No 54 Modern Pen Company (1914)
36 federal appellate · 33 district · 8 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on McLean v. Fleming · Singer Manuf'G Co v. June Manuf'G Co · Canal Company v. Clark · Standard Paint Company v. Trinidad Asphalt Manufacturing Company · Brown Chemical Co. v. Meyer
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 121 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * Both of these matters are small survivals from a time when they were literally true, and , are far too insignificant when taken with the total character of the plaintiff’s advertising to leave him a defenseless prey to the world.” 221 U.S. at page 273 , 31 S. Ct. at page 557 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“To call pills Beecham's pills is to call them the plaintiff's pills. The statement that the defendant makes them does not save the fraud. That is not what the public would notice or is intended to notice, and, if it did, its natural interpretation would be that the defendant had bought the original business out and was carrying it on.”
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.