Benham v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
215 F.2d 472 · 1954
Citation profile
40 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2011 · most notably United States v. Bright (1980), United States v. Habig (1968)
40 federal appellate · 2 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 Berger v. United States · Viereck v. United States · Blitz v. United States · New York Cent Co v. Johnson · Demetree 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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * While the returns show on their face that the joint community income of the husband and wife was determined and divided in half for tax purposes, that fact alone does not suffice to establish that the husband either filed or caused to be filed the wife’s separate return. That return was not signed by the husband, but was signed by the wife and by the accountant who prepared it, and the evidence is entirely consistent with the theory that they were the only ones responsible for its filing. The husband’s erroneous records may have accounted for the errors in the wife’s return, but the crime was not complete until the return was filed, and to be guilty under the fourth count the husband must either have filed his wife’s return or have caused it to be filed. There is no evidence that he did either.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Each case stands upon its own peculiar facts and circumstances as to whether a defendant has been afforded a fair trial.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“so grossly prejudicial that the harm could not be removed by objections or instructions.”
2 later decisions 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.