Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 314 F.2d 89 - Joseph Moss v. Albert H. Hornig

Joseph Moss v. Albert H. Hornig’s Empirical Analysis

314 F.2d 89 · 1963

Citation profile

132
cited by 132 later decisions
17
states following
November 2000
most recently cited

56 federal appellate · 13 district · 30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 132 later decisions — most recently November 2000 · most notably United States v. Berrios (1974), United States v. Philip Berrigan, in No. 72-1938, and Elizabeth McAlister Appeal of Elizabeth McAlister In (1973)

56 federal appellate · 13 district · 30 state decisions — followed in 17 states

57019631970198019902000decided

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 McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization · Oyler v. Boles · Snowden v. Hughes · Palmer v. Hoffman

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

  1. “(t)o show that unequal administration of a state statute offends the equal protection clause one must show an intentional or purposeful discrimination.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““[T]he conscious exercise of some selectivity in enforcement is not in itself a federal constitutional violation. Even though the statistics in this case might imply a policy of selective enforcement, it was not stated that the selection was deliberately based upon an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion or other arbitrary classification. . : . ””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““Federal courts of equity have always been loathe to restrain criminal prosecutions by states, even on constitutional grounds, where all constitutional issues can be decided in the first instance as a matter of course by the state courts.””
    2 later decisions 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.