Litsinger v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
44 F.2d 45 · 1930
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently June 2012
15 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
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
Relies on People v. Cardinelli · Carle v. People · People v. Baskin
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“, , . , ,, , . , The rule which permits the trial . , court to call and examine a witness at the request of the -government s attorney is quite_ a reasonable one and is well recognized. If judicious-y exercised it is productive of no harm; and many times, by extend-mg to attorneys the right to cross-examine and to impeach cm material matters, it prevents a failure of jus1 e‘”
2 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.