Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 384 U.S. 373 - Cheff v. Schnackenberg

Cheff v. Schnackenberg’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

914
cited by 914 later decisions
39
cited 39 times by the Supreme Court
40
states following
January 2022
most recently cited

351 federal appellate · 41 district · 338 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 914 later decisions (39 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2022 · most notably Duncan v. State of Louisiana (1968), Spencer v. State of Texas a Bell (1967)

351 federal appellate · 41 district · 338 state decisions — followed in 40 states

39501966197019801990200020102020decided

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 Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 45 (§ 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914) · 18 U.S.C. § 1 · 18 U.S.C. § 401 · 18 U.S.C. § 402

Relies on Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co. · Shillitani v. United States · Offutt v. United States · Cooke v. United States · Lawton v. Steele

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

  1. “Since Cheff received a sentence of six months' imprisonment [for criminal contempt] . . . Cheff's offense can be treated only as `petty' in the eyes of the statute and our prior decisions.”
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(i)n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury . . . .”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. ““ ‘ * * * in that class or grade of offences called petty offences, which, according to the common law, may be proceeded against summarily in any tribunal legally constituted for that purpose,’ a jury trial is not required. And as late as 1937 the Court reiterated in District of Columbia v. Clawans, 300 U.S. 617, 624 , 57 S.Ct. 660 , 81 L.Ed. 843 , that: Tt is settled by the decisions of this Court * * * that the right of trial by jury * * * does not extend to every criminal proceeding. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution there were numerous offenses, commonly described as “petty,” which were tried summarily without a jury. * * *’ See also Natal v. State of Louisiana, 139 U.S. 621 , 11 S.Ct. 636 , 35 L.Ed. 288 (1891); Lawton v. Steele, 152 U.S. 133, 141-142 , 14 S.Ct. 499 , 38 L.Ed. 385 (1894) ; Schick v. United States, 195 U.S. 65, 68-72 , 24 S.Ct. 826 , 49 L.Ed. 99 (1904); District of Columbia v. Colts, 282 U.S. 63, 72-73 , 51 S.Ct. 52 , 75 L.Ed. 177 (1930). * * *””
    4 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.