Scott v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
292 F.2d 49 · 1961
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently December 1983
8 federal appellate ·
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 26 U.S.C. § 5841 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968)
Relies on United States v. Hayman · Wales ex rel. Wales Trucking Co. v. United States · Massengale v. United States · Isserman v. Ethics Committee of Essex County Bar Ass'n · Moulthrope v. Matus
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The District Judge pointed out that there was no controversy with respect to the Court’s files and records and that the transcript adequately refuted the allegations contained in appellant’s motion, that such allegations constituted mere denials of fact which hé readily admitted at his arraignment and were insufficient to raise substantial issues of fact within the meaning of United States v. Hayman, 342 U.S. 205 , 72 S.Ct. 263 , 96 L.Ed. 232 , or to invoke the power of the Court under Section 2255, Title 28, U.S.Code, or under Rule 32(d), Rules of Criminal Procedure. The District Judge held that the files and records of the Court showed that the appellant was not entitled to relief. The motion was denied without a hearing and the proceeding dismissed, followed by this appeal, at which appellant is represented by competent court-appointed counsel. Appellant’s main contention is that he was improperly denied a hearing by the District Judge. “We concur in the rulings of the District Judge. * * * ””
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.