Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 563 F.2d 879 - United States v. Bennett

United States v. Bennett’s Empirical Analysis

563 F.2d 879 · 1977

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
August 2012
most recently cited

24 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently August 2012 · most notably United States v. Morris (1979), United States v. Tucker (1981)

24 federal appellate ·

16019771980199020002010decided

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. § 1511 · 18 U.S.C. § 1955

Relies on Glasser v. United States · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Bullock v. United States · Atlas Roofing Co. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission · Hampton 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) Whoever conducts * * * an illegal gambling business shall be fined not more than $20,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. (b) As used in this section— (1) “illegal gambling business” means a gambling business which — • (ii) involves five or more persons who conduct, finance, manage, supervise, direct, or own all or part of such business; and (iii) has been or remains in substantially continuous operation for a period in excess of thirty days or has a gross revenue of $2,000 in any single day. [Emphasis supplied.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The term, “conduct” as it is used in connection with the gambling business means to perform any act, function or duty which is necessary to or helpful in the ordinary operation of the business. A person may be found to conduct a gambling business even though he is a mere servant or employee, having no part in the management or control of the business and no share in the profits. A mere bettor or customer of a gambling business cannot properly be said to conduct the business.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The section applies generally to persons who participate in the ownership, management, or conduct of an illegal gambling business. The term “conducts” refers both to high level bosses and street level employees. It does not include the player in an illegal game of chance, nor the person who participates in an illegal gambling activity by placing a bet. (Emphasis added).”
    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.