Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 355 FSUPP 267 - United States v. Mosca

United States v. Mosca’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
March 1973
most recently cited

2 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3149 (Bail Reform Act of 1984)

Relies on United States v. Mendez-Rodriguez · United States v. Singleton · United States v. Mayersohn

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

  1. ““Broadly, the charge of the indictment was that the defendants had formed a scheme to defraud those seeking and those granting mortgage loans by forming a straw company having no real assets which would for a fee issue commitment or ‘take-out’ letters by which it bound itself to purchase construction loan mortgages made by lending institutions. Such commitment letters were meant to enable prospective borrowers to obtain mortgage financing for construction projects which the lending institutions would not otherwise finance because of their unwillingness to make long term real estate mortgage loans. The fraud consisted in defrauding prospective borrowers of the fees they paid for the worthless commitment letters and defrauding the lending institutions by inducing them to lend in reliance on the worthless commitment letters.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““And, incidentally, you may have noticed that even though Wuensche testified without contradiction a couple of times that he was living with his wife and that apparently his wife didn’t think enough of the story to come here and support it in any respect.””
    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.