Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 249 F.2d 114 - Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield

Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield’s Empirical Analysis

249 F.2d 114 · 1957

Citation profile

79
cited by 79 later decisions
8
cited 8 times by the Supreme Court
9
states following
December 1980
most recently cited

38 federal appellate · 6 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 79 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1980 · most notably Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964), California v. LaRue (1973)

38 federal appellate · 6 district · 14 state decisions

5001957196019701980decided

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 Roth v. United States · Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson · Kingsley Books, Inc. v. Brown · Ex parte Jackson · Niemotko v. State of Maryland Kelley

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

  1. ““Where the dominant purpose of nudity is to promote lust, it is obscene and indecent. The distribution and sale of the magazines in this case is a most objectionable example. The dominant purpose of the photographs in these magazines is to attract the attention of the public by an appeal to their sexual impulses. * * * Men, women, youths of both sexes, and even children, can purchase these magazines. They will have a libidinous effect upon most ordinary, normal, healthy individuals. Their effect upon the abnormal individual may be more disastrous.” ( 249 F. 2d 114, 118, 119 )”
    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.