Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 86 N.M. 1 - Wollen v. State

Wollen v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
September 2005
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 2005

18 state decisions

801974198019902000decided

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 Mayberry v. Pennsylvania · Johnson v. Mississippi · People v. Kurz · People v. Kurz · State v. Wollen

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

  1. “[I]n the absence of circumstances necessitating immediate corrective action (i.e., a summary contempt proceeding) a person accused of contempt by a trial judge should be tried before a different judge, one not involved in the subject matter of the contempt or in the citation of the contemnor.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “the personalities and temperaments of judges vary considerably from judge to judge and what might `embroil' one judge might not so affect another. The sound administration of justice should not allow for such an arbitrary standard.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “when a judge becomes embroiled to the point where it is unlikely that he can maintain the calm detachment necessary for fair adjudication, then he should be prohibited from rendering the contempt judgment.”
    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.