Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 89 F.3d 5 - Star Financial Services, Inc. v. AASTAR Mortgage Corp.

Star Financial Services, Inc. v. AASTAR Mortgage Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

89 F.3d 5 · 1996

Citation profile

100
cited by 100 later decisions
2
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 56 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 100 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably International Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers v. Winship Green Nursing Center (1996), Ip Lund Trading v. Kohler Co Ip

28 federal appellate · 56 district · 5 state decisions

5001996200020102020decided

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 McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Co. · Liteky v. United States · Tennessee v. Middlebrooks · Grendel's Den, Inc. v. Larkin · Linthicum v. Archambault

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 100 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) the similarity of the marks; (2) the similarity of the goods; (3) the relationship between the parties’ channels of trade; (4) the relationship between the parties’ advertising; (5) the classes of prospective purchasers; (6) evidence of actual confusion; (7) the defendant’s intent in adopting its mark; and (8) the strength of the plaintiffs mark.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[w]e look to 'the length of time the mark has been used, its renown in the plaintiff's field of business, and the plaintiff's actions to promote the mark.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “1) that [it] uses, and thereby `owns' a mark; 2) that the defendant is using that same or a similar mark; 3) that the defendant's use is likely to confuse the public, thereby harming the plaintiff.”
    2 later decisions 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.