Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 176 F.2d 796 - Walker v. United States

Walker v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

176 F.2d 796 · 1949

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
2
states following
February 2004
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently February 2004

17 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

701949195019601970198019902000decided

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 26 U.S.C. § 1 (Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2008)

Relies on Dunn v. United States · United States v. Denny · O'Neill v. United States · American Processing & Sales Co. v. Campbell · McClintock v. United States

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

  1. “Count One, however, does not incorporate by reference either Count Five or Count Thirty-Two and neither of them refers to Count One. Only Count Two, which does not name the DeMetris as defendants, incorporates Count One by reference. The indictment as drawn does not admit of Counts Five and Thirty-Two being used as predicate acts for Count One. “Each count in an indictment is regarded as if it was a separate indictment.” ... “Each count must stand on its own, and cannot depend for its validity on allegations in another count not specifically incorporated.” ... We find Count One legally insufficient as to Charles and James DeMetri because it fails to charge that they agreed to commit two predicate crimes. It must, therefore, be dismissed as to them, and their convictions on it reversed.”
    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.