Ingber v. Enzor’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

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

1. “Ingber was convicted for mail fraud in connection with his election and tenure as Supervisor for the Town of Fallsburg, New York. The indictment charged that Ingber, by falsifying voting documents including absentee ballots cast in the election, had defrauded the citizens of Fallsburg “of their ballots and their right to a fair and impartial electoral process,” and that he had obtained through fraud “the salary, powers and privileges of the Office of Supervisor” (“count nine” or the “election fraud scheme”). In addition, Ingber was charged, inter alia, with using the mails as part of a scheme to conceal his interest in co-defendant Service Scaffold, Inc. (“Scaffold”) in order to steer a $540,000 town sewer project to Scaffold [in which Ingber had an interest], thereby depriving Fallsburg of his honest services while reaping a pecuniary benefit for Scaffold (“count five” or the “sewer fraud scheme”).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 713 F. Supp. 88 - United States v. Schermerhorn · Ingber v. Enzor

2. “colloquy of counsel directed toward eliminating confusion should not be allowed to substitute for the careful procedures required to elicit the unusual result of a special verdict.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Ingber v. Enzor

3. “[u]nlike the victims of the McNally defendants' alleged mail fraud, the Town here suffered a quantifiable tangible loss.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Ingber v. Enzor