Durland v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

924 federal appellate · 86 district · 21 state decisions

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 1,272 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““If the testimony had shown that ... the defendant ... had entered in good faith upon that business, believing that out of the moneys received they could, by investment or otherwise, make enough to justify the promised returns, no conviction could be sustained, no matter how visionary might seem the scheme. The charge is that, in putting forth this scheme, it was not the intent of the defendant to make an honest effort for its success, but that he resorted to this form and pretense of a bond without a thought that he ... would ever make good its promises. It was with the purpose of protecting the public against all such intentional efforts to despoil, and to' prevent the post office from being used to carry them into effect, that this statute was passed; and it would strip it of value to confine it to such cases as disclose an actual misrepresentation as to some existing fact, and exclude those in which is only the allurement of a promise. This, which is the principal contention of counsel, must be overruled.” Id.”

   21 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Rabinowitz · United States v. Shah

2. ““Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, . for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do, places in any post office or authorized de pository for mail matter, any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Post Office Department, or takes or receives therefrom, any such matter or thing, or knowingly causes to be delivered by mail according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such matter or thing, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.””

   15 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. United States v. Brewer · United States v. Tiller

3. ““There was a partial identification of the letters by the time and place of mailing, and the charge was that defendant ‘intending in and for executing such scheme and artifice to defraud and attempting so to do, placed and caused to be placed in the post office,’ etc. This, it will be noticed, is substantially the language of .the statute. If defendant had desired further specification and identification, he could have secured it by demanding a bill of particulars.””

   10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ewing v. United States · Rumble v. United States