Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 442 F.2d 310 - United States v. Altobella

United States v. Altobella’s Empirical Analysis

442 F.2d 310 · 1971

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
5
cited 5 times by the Supreme Court
May 2000
most recently cited

54 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 69 later decisions (5 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2000 · most notably Bell v. United States (1983), Garcia v. United States (1985)

54 federal appellate · 1 district ·

4501971198019902000decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 371

Relies on O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden · Rewis v. United States · United States v. Frankfort Distilleries, Inc. · Federal Trade Commission v. Bunte Bros. · United States v. Nardello

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

  1. “‘ * * * to come within the provisions of the bill some activity in furtherance of a racketeering enterprise, subsequent to the performance of the travel, must take place * * * accordingly the gravamen of the offense will be travel and a further overt act to aid the enterprise.’ S.Rep.No.644, 87th Cong. 1st Sess. 1961, p. 2.” United States v. Altobella supra, 442 F.2d at 314 (footnote omitted).”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) distribute the proceeds of any unlawful activity; or”
    3 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.