Lear, Inc. v. Adkins
395 U.S. 653 · Decided June 16, 1969 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Lear, Inc. v. Adkins was decided on June 16, 1969 by a vote of 5–3. The Court vacated the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice John M. Harlan II wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Patents” in the Economic Activity area. SCDB codes this decision as formally altering one or more of the Court's own precedents.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 395 U.S. 653 · 89 S. Ct. 1902 · 23 L. Ed. 2d 610 · 1969 U.S. LEXIS 3099
- Docket number
- 56
- Decided
- June 16, 1969
- Argued
- November 20, 1968
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–3
- Majority opinion
- John M. Harlan II
- Opinion assigned by
- John M. Harlan II
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Patents
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- Estoppel
- Type of law
- Other
- Altered precedent
- Yes — formally altered the Court's precedent
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Dissent | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority |
Full case caption
Lear, Inc. v. Adkins
SCDB identifiers: case 1968-131, docket 1968-131-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Patents”
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.
- Anderson's-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co., Inc.
- Standard Industries, Inc. v. Tigrett Industries, Inc.
- Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois FoundationAltered precedent
- Deepsouth Packing Co., Inc. v. Laitram Corp.
- Brunette Machine Works, Ltd. v. Kockum Industries, Inc.
Cases on the same legal provision: Estoppel
- One Lot Emerald Cut Stones and One Ring v. United States
- Federal Power Commission v. Amerada Petroleum Corp.
- Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezLaw held unconstitutional
- Parklane Hosiery Co., Inc. v. Shore
- Montana v. United States
- Schweiker v. Hansen
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Continental Oil Co. v. United States
- Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad Co.
- Whyy, Inc. v. Borough of GlassboroLaw held unconstitutional
- Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. Continental Casualty Co.
- Grunenthal v. Long Island Rail Road Co.
- United States v. Concentrated Phosphate Export Assn., Inc.
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error