United States v. Scales’s Empirical Analysis
594 F.2d 558 · 1979
Citation profile
78 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 110 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably United States v. Baker (1993), 117 Wash. 2d 829 - State v. Lord (1992)
78 federal appellate · 1 district · 13 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 Holland v. United States · United States v. Radio Television News Directors Ass'n · Amperex Electronic Corp. v. New York Racing Assn., Inc. · Federal Communications Commission v. Home Box Office, Inc. · Joseph Skilken & Co. v. City of Toledo
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 110 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[e]ntirely aside from Rule 1006, there would still be ample authority for the admission of [summary testimony] into evidence.... There is an established tradition that permits a summary of evidence to be put before the jury with proper limiting instructions.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he contents of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs which cannot conveniently be examined in court may be presented in the form of a chart, summary or calculation.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he jury might rely upon the alleged facts in the summary as if these facts had already been proved, or as a substitute for assessing the credibility of witnesses.”
4 later decisions 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.