Ventimiglia v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
242 F.2d 620 · 1957
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently October 2007 · most notably United States v. Jacobs (1973), United States v. Browne (2007)
20 federal appellate · 3 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 22 U.S.C. § 611 (Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938) · 29 U.S.C. § 186 (§ 302 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act))
Relies on Viereck v. United States · United States v. Evans · United States v. Ryan · People v. . Jaffe · People v. . Gardner
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A criminal statute is not to be stretched to cases not covered, merely because it may seem to a court that Congress would have done well to cover them.”), superseded by statute, Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, Pub.L. No. 86-257, sec. 505, § 302(a)(2), 73 Stat. 519 , 537 (codified as amended at 29 U.S.C. § 186 (a)(2)); S. Rep. 86-187, at 13, U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 1959, pp. 2318, 2329-30 (noting the addition of subsection (a)(2)’s language in response to Ventimiglia). 19 . At trial, the parties stipulated that Dl-MEBA and NFOPAPE were”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A legal impossibility might also, in many cases, be termed an inherent impossibility, in that the act, though consummated, would not be criminal, and consequently an attempt to or agreement to commit it would also not be.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. King v. State“induce ... [the officer] not to organize or represent the employees,”
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.