Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 577 F.2d 78 - United States v. Simpson

United States v. Simpson’s Empirical Analysis

577 F.2d 78 · 1978

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
September 1984
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2311 (Anti Car Theft Act of 1992) · 18 U.S.C. § 2314

Relies on Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Teamsters Local Union 657 v. Rodriguez · Byrne v. Karalexis · Alvado v. General Motors Corp. · Tilton v. Richardson

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

  1. “Forging and false making of a certificate imply, for example, the printing of a bogus certificate or, in the case of a blank check, filling in the amount, payee or other terms necessary to make it a complete security. Once the stock certificate is complete, it is a genuine instrument, albeit capable of being improperly negotiated or transferred by means of forged endorsements. In this respect it differs not from an automobile transferred by means of a forged certificate of title. The security, like the automobile, remains genuine although transferred by means of a forgery.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “did with unlawful intent cause to be transported in interstate commerce ... falsely made, forged, altered and counterfeited securities ... having a value of more than five thousand ($5,000.00) dollars, knowing same to have been falsely made, forged, altered, and counterfeited; all in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2314 and 2.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(T)he application of the interpretive guideline inclusio unius est exclusio alterius suggests the conclusion that the transportation of securities with forged endorsements, other than traveler's checks, is not within the ambit of the third paragraph.”
    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.