Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 119 F.2d 539 - Simons v. United States

Simons v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

119 F.2d 539 · 1941

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
3
states following
January 1994
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently January 1994 · most notably United States v. Halbert (1981), United States v. Weiner (1978)

30 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

90194119501960197019801990decided

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. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 28 U.S.C. § 41

Relies on Patton v. United States · United States v. Trenton Potteries Co. · Bannon v. United States · Workman v. Boone · Freeman 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(Appellants) confuse the scheme to defraud, which is the gist of the offense, with the means adopted to effectuate that scheme.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““On like principles we hold that since the District Court had jurisdiction of the subject matter * * * subject only to the controlling provisions of the Constitution, and since the right to a jury trial, including the right to have the same judge proceed throughout the trial, as preserved by Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, is a privilege which the accused may forego at his election, it would be unreasonable to leave the Court powerless to give effect to the waiver. We hold that the Court has authority in the exercise of a sound discretion to accept the waiver, and as a necessary corollary, to proceed to the trial and determination of the case with the substituted judge.” Id. at 544.”
    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.