United States v. Loeb’s Empirical Analysis
45 F.3d 719 · 1995
Citation profile
26 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably United States v. Ervasti (2000), United States v. Honken (1999)
26 federal appellate ·
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. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 664 (Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 501
Relies on Murphy v. Sullivan · Nagac v. Derwinski · Johnson v. Derwinski · Cummings v. United States · United States v. Deutsch
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f the sentence imposed on the count carrying the highest statutory maximum is less than the total punishment, then the sentence imposed on one or more of the other counts shall run consecutively, ... to the extent necessary to produce a combined sentence equal to the total punishment.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“similar offenses by whatever name they are known”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“adequate . . . then the sentences on all counts shall run concurrently,”
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.