Randle v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
113 F.2d 945 · 1940
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1980
6 federal appellate ·
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 American School of Magnetic Healing v. McAnnulty · Waldron v. Waldron · American School of Magnetic Healing v. McAnnulty · Bemis v. Temple · Commonwealth v. Johnson
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the familiar proposition that to be the proper subject of an indictment for obtaining money by false pretenses the misrepresentations must relate to present or past facts, as distinguished from something to take place in the future,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“plainly described numerous false representations of present and past facts.”
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.