United States v. Lepowitch’s Empirical Analysis
318 U.S. 702 · 1943
Citation profile
130 federal appellate · 12 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 201 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2024 · most notably United States v. Petrillo (1947), Bridges v. United States (1953)
130 federal appellate · 12 district · 6 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 Moses Haas v. William Henkel · Mayo v. United States · United States v. Cohn · United States v. Barnow
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 201 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t seems reasonable for Congress to have concluded that virtually everyone who pretends to be an officer or employee of the United States and in some manner asserts authority by acting “as such” seeks “to cause the deceived person to follow some course he would not have pursued but for the deceitful conduct.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Whoever, with intent to defraud either the United States or any person, shall falsely assume or pretend to be an officer or employee acting under the authority of the United States, or any department, or any officer of the Government thereof, or under the authority of any corporation owned or controlled by the United States, and shall take upon himself to act as such, or shall in such pretended character demand or obtain from any person or from the United States, or any department, or any officer of the Government thereof, or any corporation owned or controlled by the United States, any money, paper document, or other valuable thing, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ -x- -x- * ii js iftg ajm 0f ike sec_ tion not merely to protect innocent persons from actual loss through reliance upon false assumptions of Federal authority, but to maintain the general good repute and dignity of the service itself. * * * ””
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.