Wagner v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
67 F.2d 656 · 1933
Citation profile
14 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 1971
14 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
Relies on Olmstead v. United States · Hyde v. United States · Agnew v. United States · Hyde v. United States · Powers v. United States
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“. “The Agnew case has been repeatedly approved in later decisions of the Supreme Court, and has been followed by this and other Circuit. Courts of Appeals. “In Olmstead v. United States, [9 Cir.] 19 F.(2d) 842, 845 , 53 A.L.R. 1472 , affirmed 277 U.S. 438, 48 [S.Ct.] L. Ed. 564, 72 L.Ed. 944 ,. 66 A.L.R. 376 , the late Judge Gilbert,, of this court, said: ‘And it is uniformly held that a plea in abatement to an indictment, being a dilatory plea and not favored in law, must be, pleaded with strict exactness and' with certainty, accuracy, and completeness, and must set forth facts, and not conclusions of law, nor evi dence of facts, and that every inference must be against the pleader. (Emphasis supplied.) ****** “We are deciding the case solely ■upon the theory that the appellants have failed to negative, in their proof as well as in their pleading, ■prior knowledge of the indictment ■and opportunity to have objected to ■the method or legality of organizing the grand jury, or opportunity to have filed their pleas in abatement at ■an earlier time; and, further, upon the theory that they have neither properly pleaded nor proved ‘injury’ ■or ‘prejudice’ resulting to them from being indicted by the grand jury as ■constituted in this case.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Examining the plea in abatement in the instant case, we find that it makes no reference whatsoever to the appellant’s want of knowledge of threatened prosecution, nor want of opportunity to present his objection earlier, nor assign any ground why exception was not taken or objection made before. ****** “Such a plea must be pleaded with strict exactness.””
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.