Williams v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

51 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “* * * It is clear that petitioner’s communication of March 30, 1950 to the clerk of the District Court indicated an intention to appeal. Moreover the communication was prepared in time, and the petitioner did all he could do to have it delivered to the clerk of the District Court in time. The fact- that it reached the office of the clerk a day late was not the petitioner’s fault. Had the notice of appeal been delivered promptly it would have reached the clerk in advance of the expiration of the time for appeal and the clerk could have informed the petitioner of the five dollar filing fee in time to have enabled him to pay it. In such a situation, therefore, the filing was not ineffective because appellant did not tender the filing fee. In the circumstances we think the communication should be treated as submitted in time. Wallace v. United States, 8 Cir., 1949, 174 F.2d 112 , certiorari denied, 337 U.S. 947 , 69 S.Ct. 1505 , 93 L.Ed. 1749 , rehearing denied, 338 U.S. 842 , 70 S.Ct. 30 , 94 L.Ed. 515 . Cf. Remine v. United States, 6 Cir., 1947, 161 F.2d 1020 ; Oddo v. United States, 2 Cir., 1949, 171 F.2d 854 . [188 F.2d at page 42]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. West v. United States