Decker v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 2 district ·

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

1. ““ ‘The master, as soon as his report is ready, shall return the same into the clerk’s office and the day of the return shall be entered by the clerk in the equity docket. The parties shall have 20 days from the time of the filing of the report to file exceptions thereto, and if no exceptions are within that period filed by either party, the report shall stand confirmed. If exceptions are filed, they shall stand for hearing before the court, if then in session, or, if not, at the next sitting held thereafter, by adjournment or otherwise.’ The reason of the rule is apparent. It prevents delay, gives a reasonable time, and informs the opposing party of the objections to the report. The exceptions raise the issue. The object of filing objections with the master to his draft or proposed report is to give Mm an opportunity to correct his report, reconsider any point objected to, and decide differently if ho on reconsideration deems himself in error. But these exceptions to the proposed or draft report are not a substitute for the exceptions required to be filed to the report as finally made and do not take their place. If additional time in which to file exceptions to the report of the master is desired, application to the court for such extension should be' made. Here this was not done and has not been done. The exceptions of complainant to the report of the master were filed too late and cannot be considered. There may be error in the report, in that the master did not heed the e”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. American Surety Co. of New York v. James A. Dick Co.

2. ““In getting at damages and profits in patent cases the ordinary rules of evidence should be applied so far as applicable, and no arbitrary rules should be allowed to prevail over the clear equities of the case. But an infringer, so adjudged, is held to be a trustee for the owner of the patent infringed, and, if lie has so intermixed and confused the profits received with other matters that either he or the one whose rights have been invaded, and disregarded must bear a loss, that loss must be on the infringer. This has been decided many times.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Metallic Rubber Tire Co. v. Hartford Rubber Works Co.

3. ““As for the contention that the destroyed valves ought to form a- credit against the profits actually realized by the defendant on other valves, it is sufficient to say that the only subject of inquiry is the profit made by the defendant on the articles whieh it sold at a profit, and for whieh it received payment, and that losses incurred by the defendant through its wrongful invasion of the patent are-not chargeable to the plaintiff, nor can their amount be deducted from the compensation whieh the plaintiff is entitled to receive.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Oil Well Improvements Co. v. Acme Foundry & Machine Co.