Gold v. Gold’s Empirical Analysis
1909
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1939
3 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
Relies on Podlesak v. McInnerney · 28 App. D.C. 535 - Blackford v. Wilder · In re Fullagar · United States ex rel. Newcomb Motor Co. v. Moore · Seeberger v. Dodge
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The decision determines no right between the two opponents, but one between them both on one side, and the public on the other. If either desire to appeal from the final order of rejection, he must do so ex parte in regular course of procedure. . . . We must hold that the question of patent-ability was not concluded by the decision on the original motion to dissolve the interference on that ground.” [34 App.D.C. at page 238]”
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.