Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 101 F.2d 976 - Swift & Co. v. Gray

Swift & Co. v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis

101 F.2d 976 · 1939

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
October 1981
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently October 1981

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 6 state decisions

60193919401950196019701980decided

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 Snively v. Record Publishing Co. · Mellen v. Times-Mirror Co. · Fleet v. Tichenor · 14 Cal. App. 2d 120 - Western Broadcast Co. v. Times-Mirror Co. · 87 Cal. App. 246 - Jones v. Express PubLishing 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Qualified privilege exists in a larger number of cases than does absolute privilege. It relates more particularly to private interests; and comprehends communications made in good faith, without actual malice, with reasonable or probable grounds for believing them to be true, on a subject matter in which the author of the communication has an interest, or in respect to which he has a duty, public, personal, or private, either legal, judicial, political, moral, or social, made to a person having a corresponding interest or duty. Briefly stated, a qualifiedly privileged communication is a defamatory communication made on what is called an occasion of privilege without actual malice, and as to such communications there is no civil liability, regardless of whether or not the communication is libelous per se or libelous per quod.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.