Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 340 U.S. 616 - United States v. Moore

United States v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

340 U.S. 616 · 1951

Citation profile

228
cited by 228 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
13
states following
January 2025
most recently cited

126 federal appellate · 1 district · 52 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 228 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2025 · most notably Patricia Fuller v. City of Oakland, California George Hart Antonio Romero (1995), Securities & Exchange Commission v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. (1971)

126 federal appellate · 1 district · 52 state decisions — followed in 13 states

90019511960197019801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedthe decision below (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Porter v. Warner Holding Co. · Creedon v. Randolph · Ebeling v. Woods · Woods v. Richman

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 228 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““This Court reversed, concluding that an order of restitution was a proper ‘other order.’ This interpretation was required to give effect to the congressional purpose to authorize whatever order within the inherent equitable power of the District Court may be considered appropriate and necessary to enforce compliance with the Act. * * * “Adhering to the broad ground of interpretation of the ‘other orders’ provision adopted in the Warner case, we think the order for restitution entered by the District Court in this section was permissible under § 206(b).” 3”
    1 later decision 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.