United States v. Rachal’s Empirical Analysis
473 F.2d 1338 · 1973
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2015 · most notably Rachal v. United States (1973), United States v. Antone (1979)
50 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 77B (§ 2 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77D (§ 4 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77E (§ 5 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 371
Relies on National Labor Relations Board v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America · United States v. Dotterweich · United States v. Wise · Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Decker · Carolene Products Co. v. United States
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) that the evidence was newly discovered and was unknown to the defendants at the time of the trial; (2) that the evidence was material, not merely cumulative or impeaching; (3) that it would probably produce an acquittal; and (4) that failure to learn of the evidence was due to no lack of diligence on the part of the defendants.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“But by its own terms this expansive enumeration of ‘issuer’ is only for the purpose of paragraph (11), whose subject matter is not the imposition of criminal responsibility ... but rather the definition of underwriter.’’); Shaw v. United States, 131 F.2d 476, 480 (9th Cir.1942) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Leiter v. Kuntz“based on other grounds, which must be made within seven days after verdict”
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.