Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 277 U.S. 97 - L. P. Larson, Jr., Co. v. Wm. Wrigley, Jr., Co.

L. P. Larson, Jr., Co. v. Wm. Wrigley, Jr., Co.’s Empirical Analysis

277 U.S. 97 · 1928

Citation profile

170
cited by 170 later decisions
10
cited 10 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
April 2020
most recently cited

60 federal appellate · 22 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 170 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2020 · most notably National Mut Ins Co of District of Columbia v. Tidewater Transfer Co Inc (1949), Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp. (1940)

60 federal appellate · 22 district · 7 state decisions

44019281930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedLarson v. Wrigley (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Galveston Electric Co. v. City of Galveston · L. P. Larson, Jr., Co. v. Wm. Wrigley, Jr., Co. · Larson v. Wrigley · Macbeth-Evans Glass Co. v. L. E. Smith Glass 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 170 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It would be unjust to charge an infringer with the gross amount of his sales without allowing him for the materials and labor that were necessary to produce the things sold, but it does not follow that he should be allowed what he paid for the chance to do what he knew he had no right to do.””
    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.