Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 492 F.2d 631 - Carey v. Hume

Carey v. Hume’s Empirical Analysis

492 F.2d 631 · 1974

Citation profile

184
cited by 184 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
19
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

61 federal appellate · 35 district · 38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 184 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2016 · most notably 20 Cal. 3d 844 - Britt v. Superior Court (1978), Zerilli v. Smith (1981)

61 federal appellate · 35 district · 38 state decisions — followed in 19 states

79019741980199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1292

Relies on New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Branzburg v. Hayes · Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts · Garrison v. State of Louisiana · Schneider v. State

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

  1. “The values resident in the protection of the confidential sources of newsmen certainly point towards compelled disclosure from the newsman himself as normally the end, and not the beginning, of the inquiry.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “last resort after pursuit of other opportunities has failed.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “If a newsman believes that the grand jury investigation is not being conducted, in good faith he is not without remedy. Indeed, if the newsman is;called upon to give information bearing only a. remote and tenuous relationship to the subject of the investigation, or if he has some other reason to believe that his testimony implicates confidential source relationships without a legitimate need of law enforcement, he will have access to the court on a motion to quash and an appropriate protective order may be entered. The asserted claim to privilege should be judged on its facts by the striking of a proper balance between freedom of the press and the obligation of all citizens to give relevant testimony with respect to criminal conduct. The balance of these vital constitutional and societal interests on a case-by-case basis accords with the tried and traditional way of adjudicating such questions.”
    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.