Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 200 F.1d 622 - Ex parte King

Ex parte King’s Empirical Analysis

200 F. 622 · 1912

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
January 1936
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently January 1936

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

50191219201930decided

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 Ex parte Lange · Bain Jr · Wilson · Ex parte Parks · Stokes 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It is only necessary that the scheme to defraud should be devised, or intended to be devised, and a letter placed in the post office ‘for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do.’ ””
    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.