Yarborough v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
230 F.2d 56 · 1956
Citation profile
88 federal appellate · 6 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 111 later decisions — most recently May 2003 · most notably United States v. Barnes (1979), United States v. Barker (1975)
88 federal appellate · 6 district · 6 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. § 1400
Relies on United States v. Murdock · Botany Worsted Mills v. United States · Panama Co v. Johnson · United States v. Angeline Lombardo · Engel v. Davenport
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 111 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ T instruct you that the only bad purpose or bad motive, which it is necessary for the Government to prove in this case is the deliberate intention not to file returns which the defendant knew ought to have been filed, so that the Government would not know the extent of the liability.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Ignorance of the law is no defense to crime, except that, where wilfulness is an element of the crime, ignorance of a duty imposed by law may negative wilfulness in failure to perform the duty.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““ ‘The defendant has testified that he thought it was necessary to pay the tax at the time he filed the return, and that he did not file the returns because he did not have the money to pay the tax. Of course, the tax was legally payable in full when the return was filed. But I instruct you that the fact that the defendant did not have sufficient cash to pay the tax, even if you find that to be a fact, is not a good legal reason for failure to file a return. You should, however, consider this testimony along with all the other testimony in the case in determining whether defendant’s action in failing to file the returns was wilful.’ ” “ T instruct you that the only bad purpose or bad motive, which it is necessary for the Government to prove in this case is the deliberate intention not to file returns which the défendant knew ought to have been filed, so that the Government would not know the extent of the liability.’ ””
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.