Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 718 F.2d 931 - United States v. Stuart

United States v. Stuart’s Empirical Analysis

718 F.2d 931 · 1983

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
3
states following
August 1996
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1006 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 657

Relies on Santoni v. United States · Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe · 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 · United States v. Figueroa-Paz

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

  1. “§ 1006 provides in pertinent part: Whoever, being an officer, agent or employee of or connected in any capacity with ... any lending, mortgage, insurance, credit or savings and loan corporation or association ... without being duly authorized, draws any order or bill of exchange, makes any acceptance, or issues, puts forth or assigns any note, debenture, bond or other obligation ..., or, with intent to defraud the United States or any agency thereof, or any corporation, institution, or association referred to in this section, participates or shares in or receives directly or indirectly any money, profit, property, or benefits through any transaction, loan, commission, contract, or any other act of any such corporation, institution, or association, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “introduction of prior consistent statements made prior to plea agreement was proper”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “that actual disbursement of money is not required under section 657,”
    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.