Duplate Corporation v. Triplex Safety Glass Co of North America’s Empirical Analysis
298 U.S. 448 · 1936
Citation profile
113 federal appellate · 24 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 232 later decisions (14 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2020 · most notably General Motors Corp. v. Devex Corp. (1983), Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co. (1964)
113 federal appellate · 24 district · 6 state decisions
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
reviewedDuplate Corp. v. Triplex Safety Glass Co. of North America (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Tilghman v. Proctor · Westinghouse Electric Manufacturing Company v. Wagner Electric & Manufacturing Company · Rubber Company v. Goodyear · Mowry v. Whitney · William Oliver and Micajah Williams v. Robert Piatt
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 232 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“what the owner of the patent loses by such infringement”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The owner of the patent, in holding the infringers to an accounting, is not confined to all or nothing. There may be an acceptance of transactions resulting in a gain with a rejection of transactions resulting in a loss. Upon a statement of an account, a patentee is not looked upon as a ‘quasi-partner of the infringers,’ under a duty to contribute to the cost of the infringing business as a whole. * * * He is the victim of a tort, free at his own election to adopt what will help and discard what will harm.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“interest should run from the date when the damages are liquidated, and not, as by the present decree, from the date of the last infringement.”
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.