Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 750 F.2d 970 - Ollman v. Evans

Ollman v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis

750 F.2d 970 · 1984

Citation profile

346
cited by 346 later decisions
7
cited 7 times by the Supreme Court
32
states following
June 2026
most recently cited

93 federal appellate · 33 district · 149 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 346 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co. (1990), Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton (1989)

93 federal appellate · 33 district · 149 state decisions — followed in 32 states

156019841990200020102020decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 2381

Relies on New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. · Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al. · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire

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

  1. “(1) whether the statement has a precise core of meaning for which a consensus of understanding exists, or conversely, whether the statement is indefinite and ambiguous; (2) whether the statement is verifiable; i.e., capable of being objectively characterized as true or false; (3) whether the literary context of the statement would influence the average reader’s readiness to infer that a particular statement has factual content; and (4) whether the broader social context or setting in which the statement appears signals a usage as either fact or opinion.”
    28 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “... in order to protect a vigorous marketplace in political ideas and contentions, we ought to accept the proposition that those who place themselves in a political arena must accept a degree of derogation that others need not ... he should expect to be jostled and bumped in a way that a private person need not expect ... the debate will sometimes be rough and personal.”
    22 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “Under the First Amendment there is no such thing as a false idea. However pernicious an opinion may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of judges and juries but on the competition of other ideas. But there is no constitutional value in false statements of fact.”
    10 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.