United States v. Falkenhainer’s Empirical Analysis
21 F. 624 · 1884
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 2015
6 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
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 United States v. Curtis · Holmes v. . Carley · State v. Bancroft · United States v. Stone · United States v. Baugh
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.
““It is insisted that the purpose of Congress in this section applies to one branch of the crime of larceny; that therefore the indictment should allege the ownership and value of the property stolen, and that it was feloniously stolen, taken, and carried away. I do not so understand the purport of the section. It simply creates an offense against the postal service, and was intended to protect the sanctity oí tlio mails, and it is entirely immaterial whether the letters'taken contained anything of value whatever.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Where the offense charged is stealing a letter containing a treasury-note, it is not necessary lor the indictment to allege the ownership of the note.””
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.