Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 587 F. Supp. 275 - Stormor, a Div. of Fuqua Industries v. Johnson

587 F. Supp. 275 - Stormor, a Div. of Fuqua Industries v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
September 2007
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 2007

8 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

90198419902000decided

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)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1114 (§ 32 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (§ 43 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act))

Relies on Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Foman v. Davis · United States v. Diebold, Inc. · Prestonettes, Inc. v. Coty · Coca-Cola Company v. Tropicana Products 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “defendants have used plaintiff's trademarks in a manner which is likely to cause the public to believe that defendants are part of [plaintiff's] authorized sales network,”
    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.