United States v. Wallace & Tiernan Co.’s Empirical Analysis
336 U.S. 793 · 1949
Citation profile
217 federal appellate · 13 district · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 405 later decisions (17 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2023 · most notably United States v. Procter & Gamble Co. (1958), United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc. (1983)
217 federal appellate · 13 district · 46 state decisions — followed in 14 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 Johnson v. United States · Weeks v. United States · Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States · McDonald v. United States · Harris 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 405 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“That the dismissal was without prejudice to filing another suit does not make the cause unappealable, for denial of relief and dismissal of the case ended this suit so far as the District Court was concerned.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“To some extent both phases of the contention-scope of the order and its appealability-depend upon whether the proceeding was handled by the court as an independent plenary proceeding or one to suppress evidence at a forthcoming trial. For a judgment in an independent plenary proceeding for return of property and its suppression as evidence is final and appealable and the scope of relief in such a case may extend far beyond its effect on a pending trial; but a decision on a motion to return or suppress evidence in a pending trial may be no more than a procedural step in a particular case and in such event the effect of the decision would not extend beyond that case. Whether a motion is to be treated as independent and plenary or as merely a procedural step in a pending trial must be determined by particular circumstances. See Cogen v. United States, 278 U.S. 221 [49 S.Ct. 118, 73 L.Ed. 275].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Return of the photostats, like return of the originals, necessarily followed from the dismissal of the indictment.””
2 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.