Lindley v. Shepherd’s Empirical Analysis
24 F.2d 606 · 1928
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently October 1966 · most notably Brand v. Thomas (1938), Hansgirg v. Kemmer (1939)
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 33
Relies on Hestonville, M. & F. Pass. Ry. Co. v. McDuffee · M. & J. Tracy, Inc. v. United States · Herzog v. New York Telephone Co. · Herzog v. New York Telephone Co. · 46 App. D.C. 395 - Bijur v. Rushmore
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * His amendment was inspired by knowledge of what Shepherd had accomplished, and all doubts as to his right to appropriate what has been granted Shepherd should be resolved against him. * * *”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.