Deering, Milliken & Co. v. Gilbert’s Empirical Analysis
269 F.2d 191 · 1959
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Getty Petroleum Corp. v. Bartco Petroleum Corp. (1988), Louis Vuitton Sa Sas v. Spencer Handbags Corp (1985)
5 federal appellate ·
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 15 U.S.C. § 1051 (§ 1 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1117 (§ 35 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 28 U.S.C. § 1338
Relies on Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co. · Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co. · Leman v. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co. · Taubel-Scott-Kitzmiller Co. v. Fox · United States v. Powell
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[Wjhere ... the defendant controls the most satisfactory evidence of sales the plaintiff needs only establish a basis for a reasoned conclusion as to the extent of [profits earned] by the deliberate and wrongful infringement.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“according to the circumstances of the case,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““When a violation of any right of the registrant of a mark registered in the Patent and Trademark Office shall have been established in any civil action arising under this chapter, the plaintiff shall be entitled subject to the provisions of sections 1111 and 1114 of this title, and subject to the principles of equity, to recover (1) defendant’s profits, (2) any damages sustained by the plaintiff, and (3) the costs of the action. The Court shall assess such profits and damages or cause the same to be assessed under its direction. In assessing profits the plaintiff shall be required to prove defendant’s sales only; defendant must prove all elements of cost or deduction claimed.””
2 later decisions 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.