Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 289 U.S. 224 - United States v. Darby

United States v. Darby’s Empirical Analysis

289 U.S. 224 · 1933

Citation profile

112
cited by 112 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
November 2022
most recently cited

84 federal appellate · 9 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 112 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2022 · most notably United States v. Gleason (1979), United States v. Chaney (1992)

84 federal appellate · 9 district · 9 state decisions

2801933194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Coffin v. United States · Agnew v. United States · Coffin v. United States · United States v. Corbett

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

  1. “giv[ing] assurance that upon an inspection of a bank, public officers and others would discover in its books of account a picture of its true condition.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ * * * The statute governing this offense is to the effect that, any officer, director, agent or employe of any Federal Reserve Bank, or any member bank, who embezzles, abstracts, or wilfully misapplies any of the money, funds, or credit of such member bank, or who makes any false entry in any report or statement of such member bank, with intent, in any case, to injure or defraud such member bank, or to deceive the Comptroller of the Currency, or any agent or examiner appointed to examine the affairs of such member bank, shall be guilty of a certain offense. Note the reading: ‘who wilfully misapplies any of the money’, or ‘who makes any false entry in any report to the Comptroller of the Currency with intent, in any case, to injure or defraud the bank or to deceive the Comptroller of the Currency, or any agent employed by him.’ “The intent must be present to injure or defraud the Bank and, with respect to the reports, to deceive the Comptroller of the Currency. If the act is done, and you believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the intent existed, then, of course, you have no recourse except to find the defendant guilty. If the false report was made and you believe beyond a reasonable doubt from the evidence that the intent existed to deceive the Comptroller of the Currency or any bank examiner, you have no alternative but to find the defendant guilty.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “made to represent what is not true or does not exist. . . .”
    3 later decisions 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.