United States v. Henning’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

60 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. ““The conclusion is irresistible that when in 1940 the law conditioned payments on the beneficiary’s being alive to receive them, Congress said what it meant and meant what it said.” United States v. Henning, 344 U.S. 66, 75 , 73 S.Ct. 114, 119 , 97 L.Ed. 101 . [Emphasis added.]”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hurd v. United States · Wilson v. United States

2. ““The insurance shall be payable only to a widow, widower, child * * *, parent * * *, brother or sister of the insured. The insured shall have the right to designate the beneficiary or beneficiaries of the insurance, but only within the classes herein provided, * * Title 38 U.S.C.A. § 802 (g).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hurd v. United States · Conley v. United States

3. ““Section 602(h)(3)(C), too, has a historical setting. The National Service Insurance Act as enacted in 1940 confined the class of devolutionary ■ takers to the spouse and blood relatives of the insured. So written the legislation proved unsatisfactory in practice. As construed, that provision required payment, of proceeds to an insured’s natural parents though they had abandoned him to be raised and supported wholly by foster parents, the latter being excluded from participation by the Act. Upon recommendation of the Veterans Administrator, Congress in 1942 amended the Act to foreclose that result. Persons who. stood in loco par-entis to the insured for at least one year prior to his entry into active military service were included within the Act’s definition of ‘parent.’ And they qualified as takers by devolution if they ‘last bore that relationship’ to the insured, an essential statutory condition to preclude the parceling out of proceeds among a series of transient hosts and to assure full benefits to those most likely to merit the insured’s financial support. The thrust of the amendment thus was directed at the inclusion of worthy foster parents, not the exclusion of natural parents however deserving." (Emphasis supplied.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hawkey v. United States