Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 120 F.2d 73 - United States v. Patton

United States v. Patton’s Empirical Analysis

120 F.2d 73 · 1941

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
April 1981
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1981 · most notably Jerome v. United States (1943), United States v. Gallagher (1950)

19 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

12019411950196019701980decided

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 United States v. Palmer · Commonwealth v. Eichelberger · Welsh v. People · United States v. Coppersmith · United States v. Clark

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

  1. ““ ‘Larceny, at common law, is the taking and removing, by trespass, of personal property which the trespasser knows to belong either generally or specially to another, with the felonious intent to deprive him of his ownership therein.’ Clark’s Cr. Law (3rd Ed.) 305. One of the essential elements of the crime is that the taking is by trespass, that is, without the consent of the owner. So in Reg. v. Ashwell, 16 Q.B.D. 190, A. L. Smith, J., said (p. 195): ‘To constitute the crime of larceny at common law, in my judgment there must be a taking and carrying away of a chattel against the will of the owner, and at the time of such taking there must' exist a felonious intent in the mind of the taker. If one or both of the above elements be absent there cannot be larceny at common law. The taking must be under such circumstances as would sustain an action of trespass. If there be a bailment or delivery of the chattel by the owner, inasmuch as, among other reasons, trespass will not lie, it is not larceny at common law.’ ” 120 F.2d at page 75 .”
    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.