Bolles v. Outing Co.’s Empirical Analysis
77 F. 966 · 1897
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1941
6 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony · Thornton v. Schreiber · Eleazer Backus v. William Gould
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We are of the opinion that the section means to affix the penalty only when the sheets are shown to have been discovered or detected in the possession of the defendant prior to the bringing of the suit. The statute is apparently framed to give the party whose copyright has been invaded complete relief, by an action in which he can procure a condemnation of the infringing sheets, and at the same time recover, by way of compensation, a penalty for every sheet which he is entitled to condemn. The words ‘found in his possession’ aptly refer to a finding for the purposes of forfeiture and condemnation. The remedy by condemnation and forfeiture is only appropriate in a case where the property can be seized upon process; and where, as here, the forfeiture declared is against property of the ‘offender,’ it is only appropriate when it can be seized in his hands. The section contemplates two remedies, enforceable in a single suit, each of which depends upon the same state of facts. The aggrieved party may, at his election, pursue either one or both remedies. But it does not contemplate a recovery of penalties, except in respect to the sheets which can he condemned.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Counsel for defendants in error, Schreiber & Sons’, insist that the words ‘found in his possession’ are to be construed as referring to the finding of the jury; that the expression means simply that, where sheets arc ascertained by the finding of the jury to have been at any time in the possession of the person who committed the wrongful act, such person shall forfeit one dollar for each sheet so ascertained to have been in his possession. We, however, ■think that the word ‘found’ means that there must be a time before the cause of action accrues at which they are found in the possession of the defendant.””
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.