Ryan v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
278 F.2d 836 · 1960
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably Cohen v. United States (1962), United States v. Thompson (1974)
25 federal appellate · 1 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 18 U.S.C. § 220
Relies on Bell v. United States · United States v. Turley · United States v. Bramblett · United Mine Workers of America v. Benedict Coal Corporation · Arroyo 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“does not require that such statute be strained or distorted in order to exclude conduct clearly intended to be within its scope. . . . Where the general purpose of legislation is manifest and subserved by giving words their ordinary meaning, the rule that criminal statutes are to be strictly construed is inapplicable. Although provisions of criminal statutes should be confined to their literal terms, even penal provisions of statutes must be given fair meaning in accord with the evident intent of Congress. . . . Though penal laws are to be strictly construed, they are not to be construed so strictly as to defeat the obvious intention of Congress. . . . The rule of common sense must be applied to the construction of criminal statutes, the same as others.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Whoever, being an officer ... of any bank, . . . stipulates for or receives or consents or agrees to receive any fee, commission, gift, or thing of value, from any . . . corporation, for procuring or endeavoring to procure for such . . . corporation . . . from any such bank . . . any loan . . . shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than one year or both.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“remove from the path of bank officials the temptation to enrich themselves at the expense of the borrowers or the bank, and also to prevent improvident loans.”
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.