Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 262 F.1d 6 - Dye v. United States

Dye v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

262 F. 6 · 1919

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
December 1954
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1954

12 federal appellate · 1 district ·

10019191920193019401950decided

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 Armour Packing Company v. United States · Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Mottley · New York New Haven Hartford Railroad Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission · Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Puritan Coal Mining Company · United States of America v. Union Stock Yard & Transit Company of Chicago No 621 Chicago Junction Railway Company

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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Rule 61. Harmless Error No error in either the admission or the exclusion of evidence and no error or defect in any ruling or order or in anything done or omitted by the court or by any of the parties is ground for granting a new trial or for setting aside a verdict or for vacating, modifying or otherwise disturbing a judgment or order, unless refusal to take such action appears to the court inconsistent with substantial justice. The court at every stage of the proceeding must disregard any error or defect in the proceeding which does not affect the substantial rights of the parties.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Even if there had been distinct errors in the admission or rejection of testimony, or in the charge, they would not justify reversal. The guilt of the defendant was so conclusively proved that his acquittal would have been a clear miscarriage of justice.””
    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.