Grau v. Forge’s Empirical Analysis
1919
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Pendergrast v. United States (1969), Stepp v. United States (1953)
8 federal appellate · 46 state decisions
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 Franks v. Smith · Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway Co. v. Cundiff · Lancaster v. McKay · Bruce v. Scully
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Suits for false arrest and imprisonment are very similar in their nature to those for malicious prosecution. The chief difference in the two cases consists in the persons proceeded against. In the one case the defendant is the person making the arrest, while in the other he is the one who sets the law in motion and causes the arrest to be made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martin v. O'Daniel
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.