Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 137 F.2d 71 - Spence v. Cole

Spence v. Cole’s Empirical Analysis

137 F.2d 71 · 1943

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
3
states following
September 2001
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently September 2001

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

401943195019601970198019902000decided

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 Murdock v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania · Douglas v. City of Jeannette · Watson v. Buck · Fenner v. Boykin · Spielman Motor Sales Co. v. Dodge

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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““We are asked to hold that plaintiffs are entitled to a declaratory judgment establishing their rights. The granting of a declaratory judgment, however, is a matter resting in the sound discretion of the court (Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Quarles, 4 Cir., 92 F. 2d 321 ) ; and it is clear that the discretion ought not be exercised in a case of this character where its only effect would be to decide matters, as pointed out in the quotation above, which could be better decided in the criminal courts of the state. This is particularly true in view of the fact that criminal actions are pending against plaintiffs in the state courts involving the identical questions as to which plaintiffs ask a declaratory judgment. See Borchard Declaratory Judgments, 2d Ed., pp. 312, 653, 1022 ; Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Quarles, supra. “The decree appealed from will accordingly be reversed.” ( 137 F. 2d at 73 .)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It is a familiar rule that courts of equity do not ordinarily restrain criminal prosecutions. No person is immune from prosecution in good faith for his alleged criminal acts. Its imminence, even though alleged to be in violation of constitutional guaranties, is not a ground for equity relief since the lawfulness or constitutionality of the statute or ordinance on which the prosecution is based may be determined as readily in the criminal case as in a suit for an injunction.””
    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.