Wilson v. Union Tool Co.’s Empirical Analysis
237 F. 847 · 1916
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
January 1925
most recently cited
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Parsons Non-Skid Co. v. Atlas Chain Co. · Weed Chain Tire Grip Co. v. Cleveland Chain & Mfg. Co. · Union Tool Co. v. Wilson & Willard Mfg. 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(9) “An underroamer body terminating in prongs forming a fork and provided with shoulders on tho inner faces of the prongs which form cutter ways and terminate in downwardly projecting lugs, and cutters mounted between the prongs of said fork and having shoulders inside the fork and faces to hear on the projecting lugs.” (19) “An underreamer comprising a body terminating in two prongs, and cutters each having two shoulders and a bearing face on tho inner side o£ each of the two shoulders to engage said prongs.”'”
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.