Microsoft Corp. v. Computer Warehouse’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently November 2022
4 federal appellate · 3 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.
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1116 (§ 34 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 17 U.S.C. § 502 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 503 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Davis, As Next Friend of Lashonda D. v. Monroe County Board of Education et al. · Correa-Martinez v. Arrillaga-Belendez · Gooley v. Mobil Oil Corp. · Aulson v. Blanchard
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he two basic elements of abuse of process are a bad motive, and the use of a legal process for an improper, collateral objective.”
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.