James Wood v. William a Underhill’s Empirical Analysis
46 U.S. 1 · 1847
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 12 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2023 · most notably Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co. (1926), Holland Furniture Co. v. Perkins Glue Co. (1928)
33 federal appellate · 12 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.
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But when the specification of a-new composition of matter gives only the names of the substances which are to he mixed together, without stating any rebuive proportion, undoubtedly it would be the duty of the court to declare the patent to be void. And the same rule would prevail where it was apparent that the proportions were stated ambiguously and vaguely.””
3 later decisions 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.