United States v. Margolis’s Empirical Analysis
138 F.2d 1002 · 1943
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently October 2012 · most notably United States v. Aviles (1960), United States v. Partin (1974)
37 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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
Relies on Williamson v. United States · Hammer v. United States · United States v. Norris · Commonwealth v. Mazarella · United States v. Palese
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The appellant contends that because Sands was an admitted perjurer his testimony should not have been considered. Even a convicted perjurer, however, may testify competently. The jury must determine his credibility.2 The court must charge that the testimony of such a witness must be scrutinized with care. The learned District Judge’s charge was adequate.””
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.