Central South Carolina Chapter v. United States District Court for District of South Carolina’s Empirical Analysis
551 F.2d 559 · 1977
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently August 2006 · most notably United States v. Hubbard (1980), Martindell v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. (1979)
16 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 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 Conley v. Gibson · Foman v. Davis · Baker v. Carr · Jones v. United States · Sierra Club v. Morton
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"It is clear that the Society should not participate in a case to which it is not a party. Even in civil cases, intervention requires an interest in the transaction or property before the court. FRCP 24. But the Society has no interest in the determination of the defendant’s guilt or innocence to justify its intervention. Moreover, there is no counterpart to intervention in the criminal law or rules. Since we find nothing in the criminal law or rules permitting the Society to intervene in this case, to introduce collateral issues, and to disrupt the pending criminal trial, we dismiss the appeal.” Id. at 563, 565.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(2) All participants in the trial, including lawyers, parties, witnesses, jurors and other officials shall avoid mingling with or being in the proximity of reporters, photographers and others in the entrances to and the hallways in the courthouse building, including the sidewalks adjacent thereto, both in entering and leaving the courtroom and the courthouse during recesses in the trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“For reasons appearing to the Court, it is Ordered that the above case is scheduled for trial in the United States District Courtroom, Columbia, South Carolina, on June 21, 1976. It is further Ordered that”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.