Commonwealth v. Rubright’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably Matter of Campolongo (1981), 296 Pa. Super. 382 - Commonwealth v. Gallagher (1982)
4 federal appellate · 42 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 Application of Fre Le Poole Griffiths for Admission to the Bar · Ferri v. Ackerman · Cammer v. United States · International Workers Order, Inc. v. New York ex rel. Bohlinger · Commonwealth v. Marcone
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The "law" is given corporeal existence in the form of the judge. When carrying out the judicial function, the judge becomes a personification of justice itself. When presiding over any aspect of the judicial process, the judge is not merely another person in the courtroom, subject to affront and insult by lawyers. “The obligation of the lawyer to maintain a respectful attitude toward the court is 'not for the sake of the temporary incumbent of the judicial office,’ but to give due recognition to the position held by the judge in the administration of the law.” ABA Standards, The Defense Function, § 7.1, Commentary at 259. The judge is the court, and a display of insolence and disrespect to him is an insult to the majesty of the law itself.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]n some instances, the court may decide that the needs of justice are fulfilled by a determination of guilt alone, without necessity for further penalty. The shame and trauma of public conviction may be punishment enough and there may be no need of any plan for “reformation” or control. In such cases, the courts should be free to make such a judgment without requiring useless probation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"[F]or conduct to be an obstruction of the administration of justice, it must interfere with and disrupt the orderly process of a court." "Mere affront to the trial judge is not enough." "An obstruction of the administration of justice is a significant disruption of judicial proceedings." "[T]hat remarks are injudicious... an affront to the dignity or sensibility of the court ... or even disrespectful or insulting ... will not, without more, justify conviction for summary criminal contempt." Inappropriate and illmannered conduct that "did not obstruct or delay the hearing ... falls short of that misbehavior which may be punished."”
1 later decision 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.