United States v. Hausmann’s Empirical Analysis
711 F.2d 615 · 1983
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2000 · most notably Johnson v. United States (1997), 41 Cal. 3d 714 - People v. Figueroa (1986)
19 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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 Sandstrom v. Montana · Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman · Sinclair v. United States · Trammel v. United States · Dunn 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In a section 1001 prosecution, “[a] material false statement ... is one that is capable of affecting or influencing the exercise of a government function.” Similarly, in a section 1014 prosecution, the false statements must have the “capacity to influence” the institution’s decision to make the loan.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] question of law is by definition susceptible of only two answers: 'yes' the requirements of legal principles are met or 'no' they are not met.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“There is another side to this coin. As a question of law, the trial court's materiality finding is fully reviewable on appeal. We disavow any notion that it is shielded by the clearly erroneous rule.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.