Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 355 SO2D 1288 - In Re Masinter

In Re Masinter’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
June 2016
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 2016

6 state decisions

2019781980199020002010decided

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 Wood v. Georgia · State ex rel. Collins v. Collins

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

  1. “`response to a question by the judge which seemed to invite and encourage further verbal sparring' is not contemptuous.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “on the assumption that it will be judiciously and sparingly employed.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"A contempt of court is an act or omission tending to obstruct or interfere with the orderly administration of justice, or to impair the dignity of the court or respect for its authority. "Contempts of court are of two kinds, direct and constructive." Article 20. "A direct contempt of court is one committed in the immediate view and presence of the court and of which it has personal knowledge; or, a contumacious failure to comply with a subpoena, summons or order to appear in court, proof of service of which appears of record; or, a contumacious failure to comply with an order sequestering a witness. "A direct contempt includes, but is not limited to, any of the following acts: . . . . . "(5) Contumacious, insolent, or disorderly behavior toward the judge or an attorney or other officer of the court, tending to interrupt or interfere with the business of the court or to impair its dignity or respect for its authority." Article 21(5).”
    1 later decision 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.