United States v. Follette’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently February 2004 · most notably United States v. Lemire (1983), Walczak v. State (1985)
34 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Swiss Nat Ins Co v. Miller · Hollandsworth v. United States · City of Tulsa v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. · Davis's Appeal · Swiss Nat. Ins. v. Miller
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[Wjithin its scope such persons as the owner of the contents of a letter stolen from the mail, the person defrauded by a scheme involving the use of the mails, the bank from which funds have been embezzled and the innocent person to whom a counterfeit note has been passed. Each of these persons has been directly and financially aggrieved by the criminal acts of the defendants involved.” 32 F. Supp. at 955 . Emphasis supplied.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Beechum · State v. Yost“* * * to aggrieved parties for actual damages or loss caused by the offense for which conviction was had * * *.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“only the offense for which the defendant is on trial before the court, and cannot be stretched to cover similar offenses committed by the defendant against the same party or various parties.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hipskind v. State
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.