Joseph Carl Brown, Jr. v. Richard P. Joseph, Esquire’s Empirical Analysis
463 F.2d 1046 · 1972
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Polk County v. Dodson (1981), Spring v. Constantino (1975)
26 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Haines v. Kerner · Pierson v. Ray · Moore v. United States · Kauffman v. Moss · William J. Bauers, Jr. v. Herbert T. Heisel, Jr
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.
“"There are other consideration of public policy. First, there is the desirability of encouraging able men and women to assume Public Defender roles. To subject this defense counsel to liability, while cloaking with immunity his counterpart across the counsel table, the clerk of the court recording the minutes, the presiding judge, and counsel of a co-defendant, privately retained or court-appointed, would be to discourage recruitment of sensitive and thoughtful members of the bar. * * * * * * ". . . To deny immunity to the Public Defender and expose him to this potential liability would not only discourage recruitment, but could conceivably encourage many experienced public defenders to reconsider present positions." Id. at 1049 .”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he most probable result of ... a decision [not to grant immunity] would be the exact opposite of what the courts want. Both the Court and the Public Defender’s Office [seek] adequate representation of defendants in criminal proceedings .... However, if a civil rights suit from unsatisfied clients is a constant threat to the Attorney involved, then there would be a chilling effect upon Defense Counsel’s tactics. Defense Counsel would be caught in an intrinsic conflict of protecting himself and representing his client.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.