Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 241 F.2d 635 - United States v. Angelo Chieppa, Abe Ivicola, Anthony Petti, and Joseph D. Polverino

United States v. Angelo Chieppa, Abe Ivicola, Anthony Petti, and Joseph D. Polverino’s Empirical Analysis

241 F.2d 635 · 1957

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
September 1978
most recently cited

40 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently September 1978 · most notably United States v. Tomaiolo (1957), Schoeneman v. United States (1963)

40 federal appellate · 2 district ·

310195719601970decided

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 Kotteakos v. United States · Johnson v. United States · McDonald v. United States · Krulewitch v. United States · Lutwak 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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Before holding the admission of certain evidence prejudicial to the defendant Washington, McDonald’s guest, the Supreme Court first found error in the denial of McDonald’s, motion. In the case at bar there was no pre-trial motion by any of the defendants and hence no underlying error the effects of which could be considered prejudicial to the appellants. The defendant Indian Hill Farms, or someone acting in its behalf, had ample time to make a motion to suppress prior to the trial. Michael Clemens, who must have been aware of the ‘raid,’ died a year before trial, but two years after the ‘raid’, during which time he made no effort to invoke Rule 41(e).”
    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.