green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
7.6 score
G Cite
cited 4× by 2 distinct cases, last quoted 1974 ·
…the occasion for facing such a possibility ought not to be forced until it is inescapably necessary
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1967 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1967
1996
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Industrial Communications Systems, Inc. v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Company
(2×)
the occasion for facing such a possibility ought not to be forced until it is inescapably necessary
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Industrial Communications Systems, Inc. v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co.
(2×)
the occasion for facing such a possibility ought not to be forced until it is inescapably necessary
discussed
Cited "see"
Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. United Gas Pipe Line Co.
See Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Standard Oil Co. (Ky.), 229 F.Supp. 586 (S.D.Miss.1964), rev’d on other grounds, 363 F.2d 945 (5th Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1007 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 545 (1967). 9 .
examined
Cited "see"
Heidi S. Weissmann, M.D., Cross-Appellee v. Leonard M. Freeman, M.D., Cross-Appellant
(4×)
See Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 306 (2d Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see"
Business Trends Analysts, Inc. v. Freedonia Group, Inc.
(2×)
See Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 309 (2d Cir.1966) cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1964); Oxford Book Co. v. College Entrance Book Co., 98 F.2d 688 (2d Cir.1938).
discussed
Cited "see"
New Era Publications International, APS v. Henry Holt & Co.
(2×)
See Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303 (2d Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967); Meeropol v. Nizer, 361 F.Supp. 1063 (S.D.N.Y. 1973), remanded for further findings, 560 F.2d 1061 (2d Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1013 , 98 S.Ct. 727 , 54 L.Ed.2d 756 (1978); Estate of Hemingway v. Random House, Inc., 49 Misc.2d 726 , 268 N.Y.S.2d 531 (Sup. Ct.N.Y.Co. 1966), aff'd, 25 A.D.2d 719 , 269 *1526 N.Y.S.2d 366 (1st Dept.1966), aff'd on other grounds, 23 N.Y.2d 341 , 296 N.Y.S.2d 771 , 244 N.E.2d 250 (1968).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jerome D. Salinger A/K/A J.D. Salinger v. Random House, Inc. And Ian Hamilton
(2×)
See Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 306 (2d Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 2232-34 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. John E. McKenzie Dale Bonura, Stephen Farrar, Stephen Reboul, Ronald F. Brink, Thomas R. Woodall and Richard Leblanc v. Cbs, Inc., Movant-Appellant. In Re Cbs, Inc., United States of America v. John E. McKenzie Dale Bonura, Stephen Farrar, Stephen Reboul, Ronald F. Brink, Thomas R. Woodall and Richard Leblanc v. Cbs, Inc., Movant-Appellant. In Re Cbs, Inc., in Re Cbs, Inc., Contempt of Court. United States of America v. Cbs, Inc.
(2×)
See Carter v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 365 F.2d 486, 488-89 (5th Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1008 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967) (where an order not itself appealable served as "the reason" for an appealable injunctive order, this Court reviewed the underlying order as part and parcel of the appealable order).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. McKenzie
(2×)
See Carter v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 365 F.2d 486, 488-89 (5th Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1008 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967) (where an order not itself appealable served as "the reason” for an appealable injunctive order, this Court reviewed the underlying order as part and parcel of the appealable order).
discussed
Cited "see"
National Business Lists, Inc. v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc.
(2×)
See Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303 (2nd Cir.1966), ce rt. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967), and Hoehling v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 618 F.2d 972 (2nd Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 841 , 101 S.Ct. 121 , 66 L.Ed.2d 49 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Alexander v. Haley
(2×)
See Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 309 (2d Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967); Gardner v. Nizer, supra, 391 F.Supp. at 942 ; Fuld v. National Broadcasting Co., supra, 390 F.Supp. at 882 ; Greenbie v. Noble, 151 F.Supp. 45, 65-66 (S.D.N.Y.1957); Lake v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., 140 F.Supp. 707, 708-09 (S.D.Cal.1956).
discussed
Cited "see"
Triangle Publications, Inc. v. Sports Eye, Inc.
(2×)
See Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 310 (2d Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967). 10 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Higgins v. Baker
(2×)
Co., supra; Nimmer on Copyright, supra § 138 at 600; see Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 307, 310 (2d Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967).
discussed
Cited "see"
United Merchants and Manufacturers, Inc. v. Sutton
(2×)
See Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 311 (2d Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967); American Visuals Corp. v. Holland, 219 F.2d 233 (2d Cir. 1955) (per curiam).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Palmer v. Braun
See, e.g., Rosemont Enters., Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303 (2d Cir.1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct.0 714, 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967) (appellate court, reversing district court's grant of preliminary injunction, expressed "considerable doubt” that defendant’s act of copying 31 lines verbatim and paraphrasing eight additional lines from plaintiff's work was material and substantial enough to constitute copyright infringement); Martin Luther King, Jr. Ctr. for Social Change, Inc. v. American Heritage Prods., Inc., 508 F.Supp. 854 (N.D.Ga.1981), rev'd on other grounds, 694 F…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sega Enterprises Ltd., a Japanese Corporation v. Accolade, Inc., a California Corporation
(2×)
It is the means by which copyright advances the progress of science and art.” Id. - U.S. at -, 111 S.Ct. at 1290 ; see also id. - U.S. at -, 111 S.Ct. at 1292 (“In truth, ‘[i]t is just such wasted effort that the proscription against the copyright of ideas and facts ... [is] designed to prevent.’ ”) (quoting Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 310 (2d Cir.1966), cert. denied 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967)); CAI, 23 U.S.P.Q.2d at 1257.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Walt Disney Productions v. The Air Pirates
(2×)
Compare Rosem-ont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 256 F.Supp. 55 (S.D.N.Y.1966), reversed on other grounds, 366 F.2d 303 (2d Cir. 1966), certiorari denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 ; see 2 Nimmer on Copyright § 143.2.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Meeropol v. Nizer
(2×)
See, e. g., Rosemont Enterprises, Inc. v. Random House Inc., 366 F.2d 303 (2d Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1009 , 87 S.Ct. 714 , 17 L.Ed.2d 546 (1967).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Carter
v.
American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
v.
American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
No. 772.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 9, 1967.
385 U.S. 1008
William VanDercreek for petitioners., Wayne Babler and Leroy Jeffers for American Telephone & Telegraph Co. et al., and Spencer C. Relyea III for General Telephone Co. of the Southwest, respondents.
Cited by 172 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Ninth Circuit (4)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.