Brown v. Brough’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 1981
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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 Mooney v. Holohan · Zorach v. Clauson · Engel v. Vitale · O'Connell v. Manning · Schowgurow v. State
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““That the Grand Jury for Wicomico County, Maryland, which indicted the Petitioner on September 9, 1958 and the Petit Jury for Talbot County, which, on September 30, 1960, convicted the Petitioner of murder in the first degree were organized pursuant to the requirements of Article 36 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights and were, therefore, illegally and unconstitutionally constituted in that said juries were selected in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States. That the indictment which was returned by the Grand Jury for Wicomico County was, accordingly, invalid as was the verdict returned by the Petit Jury for Talbot County, in that the said indictment and verdict were returned by juries organized in contravention of the Constitution of the United States.””
1 later decision 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.