State v. Pulley’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently December 2016
12 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 Conway v. Statesman Mortgage Co. · Austin Products Co. v. Workers' Compensation Insurers Rating Association of Minnesota · DiCarlantonio v. United States · Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. LTV Corp. · Lindsay v. Beneficial Reinsurance Co.
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A significant distinction between traditional larceny and larceny by embezzlement ... is the time when the intent existed to deprive the owner of the money i.e. steal. If the wrongdoer intends to steal the property at the moment it comes into his possession, it is a traditional larceny. By contrast, if the wrongdoer receives the property honestly and at a later time forms the intent to steal, a larceny by embezzlement has taken place.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he conduct of the defendant subsequent to [receipt of money from victim] may be taken into consideration by the jury in determining [whether] the defendant had the intent to steal when he received the money from victim”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A person commits larceny when, with intent to deprive another of property or to appropriate the same to himself or a third person, he wrongfully takes, obtains or withholds such property from an owner. ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.