In re Moneys Deposited In & Now Under the Control of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania’s Empirical Analysis
243 F.2d 443 · 1957
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently June 2012
14 federal appellate · 1 district · 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 United States v. Schooner Peggy · Vandenbark v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co. · Hassett v. Welch · Anniston Mfg Co v. Davis · Ziffrin, Inc. 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]lthough such subsequent deposit in the federal Treasury is required by the statute to be 'in the name and to the credit of the United States' the fact is that the United States has no beneficial interest therein but holds the money as statutory trustee for the rightful owners when and if they are determined by the court.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] prospective construction is the more appropriate where as here it will eliminate a serious question of constitutional validity which would arise if the statute were to be given retroactive effect.”
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.