Hunt v. Armour & Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently September 1970
4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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 Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co. · McClain v. Ortmayer · Union Paper-Bag Machine Company v. Murphy · Smith v. Snow · United States v. Univis Lens 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Claim 2. A feather plucking device comprising a rotatable member having secured thereto means projecting from the outer surface thereof, said means 'being substantially cylindrical in shape, of elastic material, and having projections on the surface thereof, a portion of said means adjacent one end thereof being hollow. “Claim 3. A feather plucking device comprising a rotatable member having secured thereto means projecting from the outer surface thereof, said means being substantially cylindrical in shape, of elastic material, and having projections on the surface thereof, a portion of said means having a thin wall and the remainder thereof having thicker wall portions.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * It is my holding, and the record shows conclusively, that until the Hunt patent and the disclosures made by Hunt there was never any machine built that successfully picked chickens mechanically. * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hunt v. Armour & Co.“* * * Each and everyone of them, including Bouda, was merely an inventor's dream. None of them was ever built and none of them ever picked a chicken. * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hunt v. Armour & Co.
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.