Etheredge v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
186 F. 434 · 1911
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 1976
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Rector Etc of Holy Trinity Church v. United States · Durland v. United States · Pointer v. United States · United States v. Hess · United States v. Carll
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A mere fraudulent promise to be performed in the future, whereby one obtains goods from another, without paying for them, disconnected from anything in the transaction which amounts to a ‘scheme or artifice,’ will not suf fice to uphold a conviction for a violation of section 5480 of the Revised Statutes as amended by the act of March 2, 1889. Whether such conduct would come within the statute, as it appears greatly enlarged in section 215 of the Penal Code (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1909, p. 1455), or whether the making of a fraudulent promise as a means of obtaining property, constitutes a ‘scheme or artifice’ within its meaning, is not involved in this writ of error, and no opinion is intended to bo expressed as to it. The inclusion in the revision of the statute of the words ‘for obtaining money or property by moans of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises,’ not found in it before, after frequent amendments to broaden the scope of the legislation, is persuasive at least that Congress in its legislation prior to that amendment has not construed a mere false or fraudulent promise, standing alone, to constitute a ‘scheme or artifice.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“set out clearly what the artifice was wherein the fraud consisted, and how it was to be accomplished”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.