Daniel South John Stouffer Jacob Fiery Daniel Middlekauff Senior and John Brewer v. The State of Maryland Use of Jonathan W Pottle’s Empirical Analysis
59 U.S. 396 · 1855
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 1 district · 77 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 120 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2018 · most notably Daniels v. Williams (1986), Gordon v. Bridgeport Housing Authority (1988)
14 federal appellate · 1 district · 77 state decisions — followed in 26 states
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 MINOR v. the Mechanics Bank of Alexandria · People v. Brush
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 120 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]ielding the executive power for the preservation of the public peace . . . is a public duty, for neglect of which [the consevator of the peace] is amenable to the public, and punishable by indictment only.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“allege[d] no special individual right, privilege, or franchise . . . from the enjoyment of which he has been restrained or hindered. . . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““[T]he sheriff, being present, the plaintiff, Pottle, applied to him for protection, and requested him to keep the peace of the State of Maryland, he, the said sheriff, having power and authority so to do. That the sheriff neglected and refused to protect and defend the plaintiff, and to keep the peace, wherefore, it is charged, ‘the sheriff did not well and truly execute and perform the duties required of him by the laws of said State’.... It assumes as a postulate, that every breach or neglect of a public duty subjects the officer to a civil suit by any individual who, in consequence thereof, has suffered loss or injury ... because he has not ‘executed and performed all the duties required of and imposed on him by the laws of the State.’ ””
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.