Coast v. Dubbs’s Empirical Analysis
88 F.2d 734 · 1937
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1999
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 Lindley v. Shepherd · Briggs v. Kaisling · Ellis v. Shaw · Steenstrup v. Morton · In re Ball
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.
“Under all the facts of this case, we think a prima facie showing of inherency was made in the application of Dubbs, and that it was, therefore, incumbent upon Coast as the junior party to show lack of inherency . . . . [Id. 88 F.2d at 738 , 24 CCPA at 1030 , 33 USPQ at 96.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Snitzer v. Etzel
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.