Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 427 F.2d 546 - Dallago v. United States

Dallago v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

427 F.2d 546 · 1969

Citation profile

118
cited by 118 later decisions
7
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

78 federal appellate · 5 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 118 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably United States v. Polizzi (1974), United States v. Calabro (1972)

78 federal appellate · 5 district · 18 state decisions

4901969197019801990200020102020decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77X (§ 24 of the Securities Act of 1933)

Relies on Bruton v. United States · United States v. Wade · Kotteakos v. United States · Holland v. United States · Costello 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 118 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The jury deliberated for five days, and one would expect that if the evidence of guilt was overwhelming the jury would have succumbed much sooner.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he principle that the jury may consider only matter that has been received in evidence is so fundamental that a breach of it should not be condoned if there is the slightest possibility that harm could have resulted. . . . [Citations omitted.] [United States v. Ad ams, 385 F.2d 548, 550-51 (2d Cir.1967).]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(t)he conviction necessarily rests to a substantial degree on the jury's assessment of the credibility of the opposing Government and defense witnesses, including appellant”
    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.