131 F. Supp. 190 - United States v. Stark’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
59 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 85 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1998 · most notably Brogan v. United States (1998), Knowles v. United States (1955)
59 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 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 12 U.S.C. § 1701 (Affordable Housing for Seniors and Families Act) · 12 U.S.C. § 221 (§ 1 of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913) · 12 U.S.C. § 264 · 15 U.S.C. § 715 · 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 1010 · 18 U.S.C. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments) · 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956)
Relies on United States v. Gilliland · United States v. Bramblett · United States v. Beacon Brass Co. · Wales ex rel. Wales Trucking Co. v. United States · United States v. Cohn
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 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The pertinent statute does not limit the offense to formal statements, to written statements, or to statements under oath. It applies to ‘any false or’ fraudulent statements or representation, * * * in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States.’ ””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to protect the government from the affirmative or aggressive and voluntary actions of persons who take the initiative, or, in other words, to protect the government from being the victim of some positive statement, whether written or oral, which has the tendency and effect of perverting its normal proper activities.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * The statute is broad in its scope and is designed to protect the authorized functions of governmental departments and agencies from the perversions which might result from the deceptive practices forbidden by it (citing cases). It is in effect designed to insure to the whole world, governmental em ployees and the general public alike, that any record, document, instrument or statement made by a governmental employee, great or small, in his official capacity and in the course of his official duties can be relied upon by all.” (Emphasis added.)”
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.