Kann v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
323 U.S. 88 · 1944
Citation profile
807 federal appellate · 58 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,126 later decisions (20 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2024 · most notably Schmuck v. United States (1989), United States v. Lane (1986)
807 federal appellate · 58 district · 14 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedKann v. United States (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Burton v. United States · United States v. Solomon Kenofskey · City of Douglas v. Federal Reserve Bank · Dakin v. Bayly
Cited together with Pereira v. United States · United States v. Maze · Parr v. United States · United States v. Sampson · Schmuck 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 1,126 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The federal mail fraud statute does not purport to reach all frauds, but only those limited instances in which the use of the mails is a part of the execution of the fraud, leaving all other cases to be dealt with by appropriate state law.”
35 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The scheme ... had reached fruition. The persons intended to receive the money had received it irrevocably. It was immaterial to them, or to any consummation of the scheme, how the bank which paid or credited the check would collect from the drawee bank. It cannot be said that the mailings in question were for the purpose of executing the scheme, as the statute requires.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises . . . for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do . . . knowingly causes to be delivered by mail according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any [matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal Service] shall be fined not more than $1000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.” 18 U.S.C. § 1341 .”
12 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.