Stein v. New York

1953-06-15 · Supreme Court of the United States · United States

4What it rests on

8Relied on since

0Departed from

Relied on since

The judgments that cite this one. This is the answer that tells you the case is still alive.

+1 earlier19632 judgments19641 judgments19651 judgments19661 judgments7 years silent19731 judgments10 years silent19831 judgments

8 judgments have relied on it, across 1961–1983

first 1961 · last 1983 · busiest 1963 (2 judgments)

1983-05-27Peter Joseph CALDARERA, Jr., Etc., Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. EASTERN AIRLINES, INC., and United States of America, Defendants-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 1973-05-29Schneckloth, Conservation Center Superintendent v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States 1966-06-13Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States×3 1965-04-05Pointer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States 1964-06-22Jackson v. Denno, WardenSupreme Court of the United States 1963-05-27Haynes v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States 1963-03-18SHOTWELL MANUFACTURING CO. Et Al. v. UNITED STATESSupreme Court of the United States 1961-06-19Culombe v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States

What it rests on

1951-11-13United States v. CarignanSupreme Court of the United States 1944-05-01ASHCRAFT Et Al. v. TENNESSEESupreme Court of the United States 1940-02-12CHAMBERS Et Al. v. FLORIDASupreme Court of the United States 1936-02-17BROWN Et Al. v. MISSISSIPPISupreme Court of the United States

64 point outside the corpus. Read from the text, but no judgment held here answers to them. They are counted rather than hidden: this corpus is a slice, not the law.

Departed from

No judgment recorded a departure from this one.

Departure is not detected yet, and the gap is deliberate. Searching for the words the Court might use was measured on 1,019 judgments: "depart from" appears 100 times and most often means departing from the facts found by a domestic court; "overruled" appears 44 times, usually about a domestic judgment; "abandon" appears 123 times, most often as abandoned firearms. Tightened to require the Court itself as the subject, precision was still around 40%, the rest being a dissenting judge complaining, or a national supreme court departing from its own case-law. Telling a lawyer an authority is dead when it is alive is worse than saying nothing, so nothing is what this says until each candidate can be judged properly.

not characterised

Most citations carry no word at all. The Court does not always say what it is doing when it cites one of its own judgments, and where it stayed silent nothing is inferred here.