Spencer v. Dixon’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently October 2001
10 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 Sacher v. United States · Thomas Patterson v. People of the State of Colorado Ex Rel Attorney General of the State of Colorado · Holt v. Commonwealth of Virginia · Blodgett v. Superior Court · Lamberson v. Superior Court of Tulare Cty.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Specification No. 1. That in the application for a rehearing filed in the matter bearing No. 47,921 of the docket of the Supreme Court of Louisiana you did include language in violation of Section 4 of Rule IX of the rules of said Court. That more specifically the language employed by you charged: “(A) that the Supreme Court was attempting to protect the district judge as there existed no legal ground upon which to deny your application for writs, and that such denial constituted a fraud of your rights, and “(B) that under the law you were entitled to the relief sought, and that the court was dishonest in denying you this relief, and that the court in denying your application disregarded the statutes and laws of this state. “Specification No. 2. That upon being cited by the Supreme Court for contempt for the use of the language as set forth in Specification No. 1 upon appearing before said court on November 7, 1965 you not only refused to apologize or recant but before the entire court and in open court when asked by Justice Walter B. Hamlin if you really believed that the court was dishonest you replied that you did. “Specification No. 3. That having been found guilty of contempt by the Supreme Court, you were sentenced to serve twenty-four (24) hours in prison. Upon your release on November 9, 1965 you did in an interview with personnel from WDSU-TV state in effect that you were unrepentent and that although your actions may get you disbarred you were sticking to your guns”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(3) Use of insulting, abusive, or discourteous language by an attorney or other person in open court, or in a pleading, brief, or other document filed with the court in irrelevant criticism of another attorney or of a judge or officer of the court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A contempt of court is any act or omission tending to obstruct or interfere with the orderly administration of justice, or to impair the dignity of the court or respect for its authority.”
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.