Evans v. Kavanagh’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 117 · 26 U.S.C. § 23
Relies on Waterman v. Mackenzie · United States v. Kales · Durkee v. Commissioner · 18 F. Supp. 938 - Night Hawk Leasing Co. v. United States · Kenyon v. Automatic Instrument Co.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The assignment of a patent must be in writing to fulfill the requirements of the federal statute. Though no particular form of words is required the instrument of transfer must be unambiguous and show a clear and unmistakable intent to part with the patent.””
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.