Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 195 F.2d 193 - Meier & Pohlmann Furniture Co. v. Troeger

Meier & Pohlmann Furniture Co. v. Troeger’s Empirical Analysis

195 F.2d 193 · 1952

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
April 1970
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently April 1970

22 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

160195219601970decided

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 Reynolds v. States · Holt v. United States · Stroud v. United States · Spies v. Illinois · Perovich 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““We shall first refer to the claim of error in denying defendant’s motion for acquittal interposed at the close of the government’s case. It is observed that after this motion was interposed and denied at the close of the government’s case, defendant offered testimony and himself testified in his own behalf. He did not renew this motion at the close of all the evidence. Defendant was entitled to offer evidence in his defense notwithstanding the fact that he had interposed a motion for acquittal at the close of the government’s testimony but by so doing he waived his objection to the ruling of the court in denying his motion and his right to allege this ruling as error, and defendant not having interposed a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of all the testimony, we cannot now consider the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the judgment and sentence of conviction.””
    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.