Smith v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
143 F.2d 228 · 1944
Citation profile
21 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably 3m Company v. M Browner, Sachs v. Commissioner (1959)
21 federal appellate ·
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 18 U.S.C. § 641 (Livestock Fraud Protection Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 791
Relies on Hill v. United States ex rel. Wampler · United States v. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Co. · Custer v. McCutcheon · Schodde v. United States · United States v. Pratt
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““where Congress, the only body possessing authority in the premises, has not seen fit to limit the time within which penal judgments for money may be collected or enforced by suit””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[n]o suit or prosecution for any penalty or forfeiture, pecuniary or otherwise, accruing under the laws of the United States, shall be maintained”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“commenced within five years from the time when the penalty or forfeiture accrued,”
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.