Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 485 FSUPP 1365 - Phillips v. Smith

Phillips v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019

12 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

1801980199020002010decided

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 Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Tumey v. State of Ohio · Reynolds v. States · Mattox v. United States · Dennis 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “imput[ing] bias to [the juror] because 'the average man in [the juror's] position would believe that the verdict of the jury would directly affect the evaluation of his job application.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “that [he] is of kin to either party within the ninth degree; that he has been arbitrator on either side; that he has an interest in the cause; that there is an action pending between him and the party; that he has taken money for his verdict; that he has formerly been a juror in the same cause; that he is the party's master, servant, counsellor, steward, or attorney, or of the same society or corporation with him.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “suspects any of the twelve jurors he may remove him for just cause . . . as where there are deadly enmities between some of them and the indicted man, or there is a greedy desire to get his land . . .; if there is ground for suspicion all are to be removed, that the inquiry may proceed free from all doubts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.