Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 5 F.2d 61 - Excella Pattern Co. v. McCall Co.

Excella Pattern Co. v. McCall Co.’s Empirical Analysis

5 F.2d 61 · 1925

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
February 1935
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Relies on Reckendorfer v. Faber · Boston Pencil Pointer Co. v. Automatic Pencil Sharpener Co. · Armstrong Seatag Corp. v. Smith's Island Oyster Co. · Outlook Envelope Co. v. Sherman Envelope Co. · A. S. Kratz Co. v. Double Envelope Corp.

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ * * * It has occurred to all industries, and in nearly every practice of life, to mark for assistance and identification two things which are liable to be confused, giving the name, number, or some identifying provision. Court records, lawyers’ papers, manufacturers, and, indeed, men in everyday affairs of life, avoid confusion by so doing.””
    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.