United States v. Hyatt’s Empirical Analysis
565 F.2d 229 · 1977
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently November 2013 · most notably Cullen v. Margiotta (1987), United States v. Manley (1980)
19 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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. § 1708 · 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 495
Relies on Roviaro v. United States · Shoup Voting Machine Corp. v. Datamedia Computer Service, Inc. · Lascaris v. Shirley · South Dakota v. Nebraska · Schmerler Ford, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While [the challenged] questioning was both irrelevant to the proof at trial and prejudicial, we are not prepared to hold that it was sufficiently damaging, given the length of the trial and the relative paucity of offending material, to require reversal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.”
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.