Hammett v. Hunter’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently March 2014
1 federal appellate · 17 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 Bland v. Lawyer-Cuff Co. · German-American Ins. Co. v. Huntley · Sanford v. Howard · Weil v. Lynds
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A. A privileged publication or communication is one made: First. In any ... judicial proceeding or any other proceeding authorized by law; * * * * * * B. No publication which under this section would be privileged shall be punishable as libel." [Emphasis supplied.]”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“1. Defamatory words published by the parties, counsel or witnesses, in due course of a judicial proceeding and which are connected with, or relevant or material to, the cause in hand or subject of inquiry, constitute an absolutely privileged communication, and no action will lie therefor, however false or malicious they may in fact be.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.