Merchant v. Levy’s Empirical Analysis
92 F.3d 51 · 1996
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Gaiman v. McFarlane (2004), Philip Margo Mitchell Margo Jay Siegel Henry Medress Stephen King Mitchell Stein v. George David Weiss June Peretti Luigi Creatore Abilene Music Corp (2000)
18 federal appellate · 3 district · 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
Applies 17 U.S.C. § 101 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 201 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 507 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 28 U.S.C. § 1338
Relies on Bell v. Hood · Coastal Steel Corp. v. Wheelabrator-Frye, Inc. · Insurance Co. of North America v. United States Department of Labor · Waller v. Georgia · Insurance Co. of North America v. United States Department of Labor
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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]e hold that plaintiffs claiming to be co-authors are time-barred three years after accrual of their claim from seeking a declaration of copyright co-ownership rights and remedies that would flow from such a declaration.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a] cause of action accrues when a plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury upon which the claim is premised.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“an action ‘arises under’ the Copyright Act if and only if the complaint is for a remedy expressly granted by the Act, e.g., a suit for infringement or for the statutory royalties for record reproduction, 17 U.S.C. § 101 , or asserts a claim requiring construction of the Act ... or, at the very least and perhaps more doubtfully, presents a case where a distinctive policy of the Act requires that federal principles control the disposition of the claim. ■”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.