Stone v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
113 F.2d 70 · 1940
Citation profile
71 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably United States v. Pennell (1984), Tillman v. United States (1969)
71 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 77 · 15 U.S.C. § 77B (§ 2 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77C (§ 3 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77E (§ 5 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933)
Relies on Mattox v. United States · Eastman Kodak Co of New York v. Southern Photo Materials Co · I. T. S. Rubber Co. v. Essex Rubber Co. · Kahn v. United States · Klose v. United States
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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““... the question is, not whether any actual wrong resulted ... but whether [there was] created a condition from which prejudice might arise or from which the general public would suspect that the jury might be influenced to reach a verdict on the ground of bias or prejudice.” Stone v. United States, 113 F.2d 70, 77 (6th Cir. 1940).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Where guilty knowledge is an element in the offense, as in conspiracy charges and the use of the mails to defraud, the knowledge must be found from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, but actual knowledge is not required; it may be inferred. Scienter may be inferred where the lack of knowledge consists of ignorance of facts which any ordinary person under similar circumstances should have known.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Jurors are human and not always conscious to what extent they are in fact biased or prejudiced and their inward sentiments cannot always be ascertained. In the present case, the juror commendably showed anxiety at the approach to him concerning the case and whether he leaned one way or the other because of the occurrence, is beyond ascertainment.”
2 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.