Schnupp v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably Hatfill v. New York Times Co. (2005), Food Lion, Inc. v. Melton (1995)
3 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 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc. · Gazette, Inc. v. Harris · Carwile v. Richmond Newspapers, Inc. · Great Coastal Express, Inc. v. Ellington
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.
“In determining whether or not the language does impute a criminal offense the words must be construed in the plain and popular sense in which the rest of the world would naturally understand them.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[cjlearly, Moore suffered damage to his reputation, embarrassment, humiliation, and mental suffering from this defamatory publication made negligently. Nevertheless, the verdict of $100,000 is so out of proportion to the damage sustained as to be excessive as a matter of law. As defendant points out, Moore experienced no physical manifestation of any emotional distress. Moreover, he sought no medical attention for any condition resulting from the publication. In addition, there was no evidence that Moore’s standing with his peers was diminished as the result of the libel. ... Actually, the evidence showed that Moore continues to be held in high esteem among his community of friends and colleagues.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“unaided by innuendo but assisted by the reasonable inferences to be drawn from the words used, while not charging a criminal offense in express terms, did impute to [the plaintiff] the commission of the offense of aiding and abetting in the possession of narcotics.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.