Goldstein v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
72 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 126 later decisions (32 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2018 · most notably Steffel v. Thompson (1974), Withrow v. Larkin (1975)
72 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 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.
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1051 (§ 1 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 28 U.S.C. § 1253 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281
Relies on Phillips v. United States · Switzerland Cheese Association Inc v. E Horne's Market Inc · First National Bank v. Dickinson · Hamilton-Brown Shoe Company v. Wolf Brothers & Company · Zschernig v. Miller
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 126 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“any party may appeal to the Supreme Court from an order granting or denying . . . an interlocutory or permanent injunction in any civil action, suit or proceeding required by any Act of Congress to be heard and determined by a district court of three judges.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“3. In any such proceeding where it is uncertain that an alien beneficiary or fiduciary not residing within the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or a territory or possession of the United States would have the benefit or use or control of the money or property due him the burden of proving that the alien beneficiary will receive the benefit or use or control of the money or property due him shall be upon him or the person claiming from, through or under him.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[b] Any assignment of a fund which is required to be deposited pursuant to the provisions of paragraph one [a] of this section shall not be effective to confer upon the assignee any greater right to the delivery of the fund than the assignor would otherwise enjoy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.