Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 346 F.2d 383 - Chapman v. United States

Chapman v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

346 F.2d 383 · 1965

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
7
states following
September 2005
most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently September 2005 · most notably Cotton v. United States (1967), Gilbert v. United States (1966)

34 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

25019651970198019902000decided

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

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113

Relies on Draper v. United States · United States v. Lee · United States v. Page · Lubin v. United States · Ross 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “This property, including Miss Hall’s personal documents, were, while owned by her and used by her in the performance of her duties at the bank and left there when she left for the day (and even while she was there for the day), “within the care, custody or control of the bank,” and thus within the statute here involved. 346 F.2d at 387 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The manner of the taking of the documents from the bank is unimportant. They were taken. Appellant was not charged with taking them, but with possessing and concealing them knowing them to have been taken from the bank. Her own theory of defense (that some unknown person took them and mailed them to her) would not justify her subsequent retention and continued possession of bank records, peculiarly known to her to be escrow records from the bank for which she had previously worked, and several, at least, being records then currently needed and in use.” ( 346 F.2d at 389 ).”
    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.