Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 464 F.2d 68 - United States v. Lebman

United States v. Lebman’s Empirical Analysis

464 F.2d 68 · 1972

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
January 1990
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently January 1990

14 federal appellate · 1 district ·

120197219801990decided

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. § 1202 · 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 923

Relies on McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Shapiro v. Thompson · Bolling v. Sharpe · M'Culloch v. State of Maryland · National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.

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

  1. “(a) It shall be unlawful - (6) for any person in connection with the acquisition or attempted acquisition of any firearm or ammunition from a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, knowingly to make any false or fictitious oral or written statement or to furnish or exhibit any false, fictitious, or misrepresented identification, intended or likely to deceive such importer, manufacturer, dealer, or collector with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of such firearm or ammunition under the provisions of this chapter.”
    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.