United States v. Northway’s Empirical Analysis
120 U.S. 327 · 1887
Citation profile
126 federal appellate · 28 district · 39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 260 later decisions (28 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2006 · most notably Coffin v. United States (1895), Moore v. United States (1895)
126 federal appellate · 28 district · 39 state decisions — followed in 18 states
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. Carll · United States v. Simmons · United States v. Britton · United States v. Mills
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 260 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Every president, director, cashier, teller, clerk, or agent of any association, who embezzles, abstracts, or willfully misapplies any of the moneys, funds, or'credits of the association; or who, without authority from the directors, issues or puts in circulation any of the notes of the association; or who, without such authority, issues or puts forth any certificate of deposit, draws any order or bill of exchange, makes any acceptance, assigns any note, bond, draft, bill of exchange, mortgage, judgment, or decree; or who makes any false entry in any book, report, or statement of the association, with intent, in either case; to injure or defraud the association or any other company, body politic or corporate, or any individual person, or to deceive any officer of the association, or any agent appointed to examine the affairs of any such association; and every person who with like intent aids or abets any officer; clerk, or agent in any violation of this section, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemean- or, and shall be imprisoned not less than five years nor more than ten.””
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In order to misapply the funds of the bank it is not necessary that the officer charged should be in actual possession of them by virtue of a trust committed to him. He may abstract them from the other funds of the bank unlawfully, and afterwards criminally misapply them, or by virtue of his official relation to the bank he may have such control, direction, and power of management as to direct an application of the funds in such a manner and under such circumstances as to constitute the offense of wilful misapplication.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"We are, therefore, of opinion that the willful misapplication of the moneys and funds of the banking association, which is made an offense by section 5209, means something different from the acts of official maladministration referred to in section 5239, and it must be a willful misapplication for the use or henelh of the party charged, or of some person or company other than the association, with intent to injure and defraud the association, or some other body corporate, or some natural person.””
3 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.