Lobb v. Hodges’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently January 2022
11 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 In Re People in the Interest of Murley · Austin v. City and County of Denver · Marshall v. Marshall · Hughes v. People · 35 Colo. App. 439 - Barbara's Lighting Center, Inc. v. Churchill
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In an indirect punitive contempt proceeding, the court may impose a fine, imprisonment, or both if the court expressly finds that the person's conduct was offensive to the authority and dignity of the court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Because an alleged contemner's [sic] liberty and property are at risk, the added precaution of the specific finding of offense to the dignity of the court is required.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[A]ny legal proceeding, in which an individual may be imprisoned ... should be treated as a criminal prosecution as contemplated by the [S]ixth [A]mendment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.