In re Colonial Stores Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
394 F.2d 549 · 1968
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Liquid Controls Corporation v. Liquid Control Corporation (1986), In re Abcor Development Corp. (1978)
6 federal appellate · 3 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 15 U.S.C. § 1052 (§ 2 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1071 (§ 21 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))
Relies on Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-Enamel Corp. · Elgin National Watch Company v. Illinois Watch Case Company W · Estate of Beckwith v. Commissioner of Patents · Blisscraft of Hollywood v. United Plastics Co. · Herren v. Farm Security Administration
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“describe[d] goods containing sugar and spice,”
1 later decision 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.