United States v. John a Davis B’s Empirical Analysis
231 U.S. 183 · 1913
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2010 · most notably Moskal v. United States (1990), Prussian v. United States (1931)
24 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Williamson v. United States · United States v. Eaton · United States v. Keitel · United States v. Stevenson · Webster v. Luther
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Coming to the text of the third paragraph, we think it is at once apparent that its provisions are so comprehensive as to prevent us from holding that they include only documents which are forged or' counterfeited, and hence exclude all other documents, however fraudulent they may be. The all embracing words, ‘any deed, power of attorney, order, certificate, receipt, or other writing in support of or in relation to any account or claim with intent to defraud the United States, knowing the same to be false, altered, forged, or counterfeited,’ leave room for no other conclusion. The context of the section reinforces this view, since the contrast, between the narrow scope of the first two paragraphs and the enlarged grasp of the third shows the legislative intent, after fully providing in the first two paragraphs for forged and counterfeited documents, instruments, etc., to reach by the provisions of the third paragraph, any and all fraudulent documents, whether forged or not forged, and thus efficiently to deter from committing the wrong which it was the purpose of the section to prohibit””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The court [in that case] fully analyzed the statute, and while conceding that other clauses of the act dealt with forged instruments in a technical sense, concluded that the case [under the third clause] was within both the letter and the spirit of the act.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“as embracing only documents which were forged and counterfeited,”
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.