Fischer v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
212 F.2d 441 · 1954
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently September 2008 · most notably United States of America, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Raymond A. O'COnnOr (1956), Bloch v. United States (1955)
49 federal appellate · 2 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 145 · 28 U.S.C. § 1732
Relies on Glasser v. United States · Quercia v. United States · United States v. Murdock · Wong Tai v. United States · Armour Packing Company 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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““During the direct examination * * *, the court directed the District Attorney to pursue a line of questioning to ‘find out where, and when, and under what circumstances’ an incident occurred. It is contended that this direction transcended the bounds of an impartial presiding judge and tended to convey to the jury that special weight should be given to such testimony. There is no merit to the contention. The trial court is not a mere umpire in the trial of a case. One of its functions is to see that all relevant facts are brought intelligibly to the attention of the jury and it may intervene in the conduct of the trial for this purpose. The court has the power, within reasonable bounds, to question a witness for the purpose of eliciting the truth and there is no reason why it may not direct an attorney to pursue a line of questioning if it is relevant to the case.” (emphasis added). Citing Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 82 , 62 S.Ct. 457 , 86 L.Ed. 680 ; Quercia v. United States, 289 U.S. 466, 469 , 53 S.Ct. 698 , 77 L.Ed. 1321 ; [Griffin v. United States, 83 U.S.App.D.C. 20 , 164 F.2d 903 ] denied 333 U.S. 857 , 68 S.Ct. 727 , 92 L.Ed. 1137 , new trial granted on other grounds 87 U.S.App.D.C. 172 , 183 F.2d 990 ; National Mut. Casualty Co. v. Eisenhower, 10 Cir., 116 F.2d 891 ; United States v. Gross, 7 Cir., 103 F.2d 11, 13 ; United States v. Breen, 2 Cir., 96 F.2d 782 , certiorari denied 304 U.S. 585 , 58 S.Ct. 1061 , 82 L.Ed. 1546 ;””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * any person who willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this chapter or the payment thereof, shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony and upon conviction thereof be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.”
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.