Stevens v. Gertz’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 1993
1 federal appellate · 1 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 Heiskell v. Mozie · Fitchette v. Taylor · 20 F. Supp. 369 - Brandstein v. White Lamps, Inc. · 9 F. Supp. 175 - Mullin-Johnson Co. v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. · Schifrin v. Chenille Mfg. 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Since no penalty for violation ... is expressly provided, it may be fairly inferable that sanctions should be applied only against those to whom the rule is addressed and who themselves infringe it, i.e., those who, not being attorneys of the court, attempt to enter appearances and sign stipulations for parties.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wolford v. Budd Co.
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.