Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 71 FSUPP 478 - Zuckerman v. Pilot

Zuckerman v. Pilot’s Empirical Analysis

1940

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
January 1972
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 1972

2 federal appellate · 2 district ·

201940195019601970decided

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 London v. Everett H. Dunbar Corp. · Taft v. Stephens Lith. & Eng. Co. · Folberth Auto Specialty Co. v. Mayo-Skinner Mfg. Co. · Newgold v. American Electrical Novelty & Mfg. Co. · A. B. Dick Co. v. Fuerth

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

  1. ““ * * * Who, in any manner, marks upon or affixes to any unpatented ar- ■ tide the word 'patent/ or any word importing that the same is patented, for the purpose of deceiving the. public, shall be liable, for every such offense, to a penalty of not less than-$100, with costs; one-half of said penalty to the person -who shall sue for the same, and the other to the use of the United States, to be recovered by suit in any district court of the United States within whose jurisdiction such offense may have been committed.” 35 U.S.C.A. § 50 .”
    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.