State v. Runge’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
2 district · 31 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 5103 · 42 U.S.C. § 5106A
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Faretta v. California · United States v. Bagley · Berger v. United States · Pennsylvania v. Ritchie
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“it is telling us that custodians have authority to release the information within the statutory framework and that if it is so released, the custodians will not be subject to prosecution under [the statute].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cure v. State“provisions are made for the protection of the identity of the reporter or any other person whose life or safety is likely to be endangered by disclosing the information . . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the subsection is not a mandatory discovery provision that directs disclosure of confidential social services records to child abusers or to the parents of abused children.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cure v. State
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.