Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 822 F.2d 896 - May v. Watt

May v. Watt’s Empirical Analysis

822 F.2d 896 · 1987

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
2
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently September 2018

8 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

701987199020002010decided

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. § 1125 (§ 43 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 17 U.S.C. § 101 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976)

Relies on Delli Paoli v. United States · Cone v. West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. · New West Corporation v. Nym Company of California Inc Nym Company of California · Chicago Great Western Railway Co. v. Kendall · Frank Music Corp. v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “). D. Prejudgment Interest 1. Availability Copart contends prejudgment interest is not available for defendants' successful breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claim because the jury's award of $4.88 million on that claim”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “was not required to make an election between the relevant contract theories he advocated (breach of contract and rescission) prior to a jury verdict.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the jury should have had the opportunity to reconsider [plaintiff's]”
    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.