Barrus’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
7 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2022 · most notably 134 S. Ct. 1377 - Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (2014), Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (2014)
7 district · 1 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
Relies on Cities of Charlottesville v. Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. · Delaware v. New York · Sanders Confectionery Products Inc. v. Heller Financial, Inc. · National Labor Relations Board v. Burns International Security Services, Inc. · Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc.
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“prong of section 43, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1125 (a)(1)(B), in order to satisfy standing the plaintiff must allege commercial injury based upon a misrepresentation about a product, and also that the injury was”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) Any person who, on or in connection with any goods or services, or any container for goods, uses in commerce any word, term, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, or any false designation of origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which (B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“light bulbs. 2 According to the complaint, defendants advertised that Energy Saver bulbs would reduce pollution, conserve energy, and lower consumers' utility bills. Each green-colored package (signifying the product's environmental benefits) bore a chart showing the savings that consumers would realize by using the bulbs. Each package also stated that the Energy Saver was a”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Barrus v. Sylvania
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.