Jolly v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
170 U.S. 402 · 1898
Citation profile
66 federal appellate · 8 district · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 106 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1991 · most notably United States v. Rogers (1961), United States v. Schwartz (1991)
66 federal appellate · 8 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Selvester v. United States · People v. Loomis & Ramsdell
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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““1. There are two' ■ distinct offenses mentioned in the statute. “One is the offense of robbery^ the legal and technical meaning of which is well known. It- is a forcible taking, ór a taking by putting the individual robbed in fear. “There is also set forth in the statute the crime of feloniously taking ■ and carrying away any kind or. description of personal property belonging to the United States. This is a distinct and separate offense from that of robbery.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Duffy v. Hudspeth““The language used in the statute is much broader and covers more ground than the common-law definition of larceny, and it is also more comprehensive than the statute of 1790. Act of April 30, 1790, c. 9, 1 Stat. 112 , 116. ‘Any kind or description of personal property’ is an exceedingly broad designation.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““In the strict sense of the common law, personal goods are goods which are mora ble, belong to, or are the property of some person and which have an intrinsic value; that bonds, bills, and notes which are ehoses in action, are not esteemed by common law goods whereof larceny may be committed.””
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.