Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 363 U.S. 370 - Parr v. United States

Parr v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

1960

Citation profile

1,039
cited by 1,039 later decisions
16
cited 16 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

746 federal appellate · 67 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,039 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably McNally v. United States (1987), Schmuck v. United States (1989)

746 federal appellate · 67 district · 17 state decisions

2580196019701980199020002010decided

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

reviewedParr v. United States (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Gully v. First Nat. Bank in Meridian · Pereira v. United States · Durland v. United States · Kann v. United States

Cited together with Pereira v. United States · Kann v. United States · United States v. Maze · United States v. Sampson · Schmuck 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 1,039 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The scheme ... had reached fruition. The persons intended to receive the money had received it irrevocably. It was immaterial to them, or to any consummation of the scheme, how the bank which paid or credited the check would collect from the drawee bank. It cannot be said that the mailings in question were for the purpose of executing the scheme, as the statute requires.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “incident to an essential part of the scheme.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(I)t cannot be said that mailings made or caused to be made under the imperative command of duty imposed by state law are criminal under the federal mail fraud statute * * *.”
    10 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.