Nations v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
52 F.2d 97 · 1931
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 1967
8 federal appellate · 1 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 Weeks v. United States · Gouled v. United States · Agnew v. United States · Chicago St Ry Co v. Coogan · Segurola 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““As said by us in Nations v. United States, 8 Cir., 52 F.2d 97, 105 , in an opinion by Judge Stone: ‘Such double inferences are too remote to constitute evidence. As said by the Supreme Court in United States v. Ross, 92 U.S. 281, 283 , 23 L.Ed. 707 : “They are inferences from inferences ; presumptions resting on the basis of another presumption. Such a mode of arriving at a conclusion of fact is generally, if not universally, inadmissibble. No inference of fact or of law is reliable drawn from premises which are uncertain.” ’ ” 7”
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.