Jurney v. MacCracken’s Empirical Analysis
294 U.S. 125 · 1935
Citation profile
64 federal appellate · 9 district · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 161 later decisions (27 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2020 · most notably United States v. Dixon (1993), Russell v. United States (1962)
64 federal appellate · 9 district · 34 state decisions — followed in 12 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Sinclair v. United States · Kilbourn v. Thompson · McGrain v. Daugherty · Anderson v. Dunn · Ex parte Hudgings
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 161 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[p]unishment, purely as such, through contempt proceedings, legislative or judicial, is not precluded because punishment may also be inflicted for the same act as a statutory offense.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“it is quite clear that the contumacious witness is not subjected to jeopardy twice for the same offense, since the same act may be an offense against one jurisdiction and also an offense against another; and indictable statutory offenses may be punished as such, while the offenders may likewise be subjected to punishment for the same acts as contempts, the two being diverso intuitu and capable of standing together.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Groppi v. Froehlich““Whether he is guilty, and whether he has so far purged himself of contempt that he does not now deserve punishment, are the questions which the Senate proposes to try.””
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.