United States v. Muschany’s Empirical Analysis
156 F.2d 196 · 1946
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently July 1976 · most notably Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. Epperson (1957), United States v. Stromberg (1955)
32 federal appellate · 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
Relies on Muschany v. United States · Wayne United Gas Co. v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co. · Pfister v. Northern Illinois Finance Corp. · Conboy v. First National Bank · Leishman v. Associated Wholesale Electric Co.
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The general rule is that if a motion for rehearing or for a new trial, or to vacate, amend or modify a judgment or the findings upon which it is based, is made seasonably and is entertained, such motion has the effect of extending the time for appeal from the judgment (sought to be affected) until final disposition of the motion. Such a motion is held to deprive the judgment ‘of that finality which is essential to appealability.’ Leishman v. Associated [Wholesale] Electric Co., 318 U.S. 203, 205 , 63 S.Ct. 543 , 87 L.Ed. 714 . This does not mean, however, that an order disposing of such a motion is an appealable order or that an appeal from it brings up for review the question of the legality of the judgment. “* * * The appeal lies from the final judgment or order challenged by the motion, and not from the District Court’s refusal to modify it. * * *””
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.