United States v. Anonymous’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. “‘‘X do not find it necessary to go into tlie distinctions between direct and constructive contempts, which are so unsatisfactory to all who study this subject. There is always a struggle to relegate every contempt to the odious category of constructive contempts, in order to take shelter under these restrictive statutes. But I may say that in my judgment the courts will find that the legislature has not taken away any valuable power, when these statutes are properly understood. Notwithstanding the seemingly formidable ar ray of authority, it may he that after all it is a mistake to say that all con-tempts not committed in the presence of the court are constructive only. The mere place of the occurrence may not he an absolute test of that question, and it may depend on the character of the particular conduct in other respects besides the place where it happens. * * * Wherever the conduct complained of ceases to be general in its effect, and invades the domain of the court, to become specific in its injury, by intimidating, or attempting to Intimidate, with threats or otherwise, tiie court or its officers, the parties or their counsel, the witnesses, jurors, and the like, while in the discharge of their duties as such, if it he constructive because of the place whore it happens, because of the direct injury it does in obstructing the workings of the organization for the administration of justice in that particular case, the power to punish it has not yet been taken away by any ”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Brule · United States v. Carroll

2. ““The courts jvill find that the Legislature has not taken away any valuable power, when these statutes are properly understood. * * * The mere place of the occurrence may not he an absolute test of that question, and it may depend on the character of the particular conduct in other respects beside the place where it happens. * * * Whenever the conduct * * * ceases to be general in its effect, and invades the domain of the court to be specific in its injury, by intimidating, or attemptfng to intimidate, with threat or otherwise, the court or its officers * * * while in the discharge of Iheir duties as such, if it be constructive because of the place whore it happens, because of the direct injury it does in obstructing the workings of the organization, for the administration of justice in that particular case, the power to punish it has not yet been taken away by any statute, however broad its terms may apparently be.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. United States v. Toledo Newspaper Co.

3. ““If the accused appears he is heard in any way that suits the convenience . of the court, hy an examination ore tenus, upon affidavits, or by propounding-interrogatories. If he deny the contempt, the court, either for itself or by reference to a master, ascertains the facts upon the proof, either party examining witnesses hy affidavit or otherwise.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Merchants' Stock & Grain Co. v. Board of Trade of Chicago