Levine Contempt Case’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently October 2019 · most notably Knaus v. Knaus (1956), Brocker v. Brocker (1968)
57 state decisions
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 Cooke v. United States · Sacher v. United States · Terry · Ex parte Robinson · Toledo Newspaper Co. 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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The power of the several courts of this Commonwealth to . inflict summary punishments for contempts of court shall be restricted to the following cases, to-wit: “I. To the official misconduct of the officers of such courts respectively; “II. To disobedience or neglect by officers, parties, jurors or witnesses of or to the lawful process of the court; “HI. To the misbehavior of any person in the presence of the court, thereby obstructing the administration of justice.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““Generally speaking, one is guilty of contempt when his conduct tends to bring the authority and administration of the law into disrespect. The right to punish for such contempt is adherent in all courts. When it is committed in its presence the court may, in punishing the offender, act of its own knowledge without further process, proof, or examination.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"But, as was well said in People v. Kelly, 24 N.Y. 74 , `. . . the conduct charged as constituting the contempt must be such that some degree of delinquency or misbehavior can be predicated of it; for if the act be plainly indifferent or meritorious, or if it be only the assertion of the undoubted right of the party, it will not become a criminal contempt by being adjudged to be so . . . . [ W ] here the act is necessarily innocent or justifiable it would be preposterous to hold it a cause of imprisonment.'" (Emphasis added).”
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.