United States v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis
606 F.2d 884 · 1979
Citation profile
42 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently June 2008 · most notably United States v. Krasn (1980), United States v. Beverly (1990)
42 federal appellate ·
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. § 1014 · 18 U.S.C. § 152
Relies on Turner v. United States · Stromberg v. People of State of California · Mobil Alaska Pipeline Co. v. United States · California v. Southland Royalty Co. · United States v. J. Joseph Kennedy, United States of America v. Robert J. Myers, United States of America v. Lawrence F. Carlson
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[T]he omission, itself, did not impede anything.... [I]t did not impede any investigation. Had there been an investigation, the proof is that nothing would have been disclosed that was not already either disclosed or discernable from the ... information that was already disclosed in the schedules.... [Mjight [the failure to disclose her valid social security number] have impeded an investiga tion into the debtor’s financial history, and/or might it have misled creditors as to the identity of the petitioner? I think the answer is no.” 30”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The rule, as stated in this circuit and elsewhere, is that the uncontradicted testimony of a ranking official of the institution is sufficient to establish that the institution is federall insured.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The scope of materiality [under 18 U.S.C. § 152 (2)] includes: (1) matters relating to the extent and nature of the bankrupt’s assets; (2) inquiries relating to the bankrupt’s business transactions or his estate; (3) matters relating to the discovery of assets; (4) the history of a bankrupt’s financial transactions; and (5) statements designed to secure adjudication by a particular bankruptcy court.”
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.