Garland v. Torre’s Empirical Analysis
259 F.2d 545 · 1958
Citation profile
55 federal appellate · 18 district · 52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 171 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2017 · most notably Branzburg v. Hayes (1972), United States v. Dionisio (1973)
55 federal appellate · 18 district · 52 state decisions — followed in 23 states
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 Hickman v. Taylor · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. State of Alabama Patterson · Schneider v. State · Near v. State of Minnesota Olson · Wilson v. United States
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 171 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Freedom of the press, hard-won over the centuries by men of courage, is basic to a free society. But basic too are courts of justice, armed with the power to discover truth. The concept that it is the duty of a witness to testify in a court of law has roots fully as deep in our history as does the guarantee of a free press.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“While it is possible that the plaintiff could have learned the identity of the informant by further discovery proceedings directed to [the company of which the source was said to be an official], her reasonable efforts in that direction had met with singular lack of success.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"[W]e are not dealing here with the use of the judicial process to force a wholesale disclosure of a newspaper's confidential sources of news, nor with a case where the identity of the news source is of doubtful relevance or materiality. [Cf. cases cited]. The question asked of the appellant went to the heart of the plaintiff's claim. We hold that the Constitution conferred no right to refuse an answer." 259 F.2d at 549-550 .”
3 later decisions 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.