United States v. Kompinski’s Empirical Analysis
373 F.2d 429 · 1967
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2313 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on Cardillo v. United States · Southern Railway Co. v. Jackson · United States v. Kahaner · United States v. Lefkowitz · Deaver 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * Mrs. Judge’s testimony had some probative value, showing that Evanco had access to the Macey phone through which he had received a call from a Chicago phone available to Burns. The trial Judge, in his discretion, felt that the probative value of the evidence outweighed the possible prejudice to Evanco which might arise through any inferences as to the nature of his relationship with Mary Macey. The record is clear that no such inferences were suggested to the jury. * * * »*”
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.