Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 F.2d 41 - United States v. Nardone

United States v. Nardone’s Empirical Analysis

106 F.2d 41 · 1939

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
August 1987
most recently cited

24 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1987 · most notably Nardone v. United States (1939), United States v. Shoffner (1987)

24 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

100193919401950196019701980decided

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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 47 U.S.C. § 151

Relies on Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States · Olmstead v. United States · Nardone v. United States · United States v. Kraus · United States v. Nardone

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

  1. “[T]he fact that one conspirator tells another something relevant to the conspiracy does not alone make the declaration competent; the declaration must itself be an act in furtherance of the common object; mere conversation between the conspirators is not that .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Congress had not also made incompetent testimony which had become accessible by the use of unlawful ‘taps’, for to divulge that information was not to divulge an intercepted telephone talk.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “whether the [trial] judge improperly refused to allow the accused to examine the prosecution as to the uses to which it had put the information”
    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.