Howard v. Sterchi’s Empirical Analysis
974 F.2d 1272 · 1992
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2017 · most notably Ale House Management Incorporated v. Raleigh Ale House Incorporated John a Duranko (2000), Miller's Ale House, Inc. v. Boynton Carolina Ale House, LLC (2012)
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Schmidt v. Lessard · Original Appalachian Artworks, Inc. v. Toy Loft, Inc. · Donald Frederick Evans & Associates, Inc. v. Continental Homes, Inc. · Universal Gym Equipment, Inc., Plaintiff-Cross-Appellant v. Erwa Exercise Equipment Limited and Global Gym and Fitness Equipment Limited
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Although the floor plans are visually similar and the layout is generally the same, the dissimilarities are significant, particularly the roof lines, the bay window and the dimensions. ... The variety of ways a two-story rectangle can be divided into three bedrooms, two baths, a kitchen, a great room or living room, closets, porches, etc., is finite. In architectural plans of this type, modest dissimilarities are more significant than they may be in other types of art works. The district court did not err in determining that the dissimilarities between [plaintiffs models and defendants’] are significant [and that the plaintiff] failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence the substantial similarity of the plans required to show copyright infringement.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“1. overall layout and proportions 2. two floors 3. three bedrooms, two baths 4. master bedroom on right side of first floor 5. downstairs bathroom has tub; upstairs has shower 6. kitchen in center rear 7. combined dining room and living room (parlor) on left side of first floor with fireplace at center of interior wall 8. stairs in center, facing main entry, master closet under stairs, linen closet to right of stairs on second level 9. small deck at rear entry off of kitchen 10. nearly identical placement of windows.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“1. dimensions of the rooms and the total area (1080 square feet of heated space versus 1212 square feet) 2. roof lines 3. bay window at left rear of [plaintiffs models] only 4. location of range, refrigerator, washer and dryer 5. open shelving in kitchen ([plaintiffs models] only) 6. placement of commode and lavatory in first floor bath 7. door placement or orientation (right or left-handed opening) in first floor bath, coat closet, master bedroom and closets.”
1 later decision 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.