MacDaniel v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
87 F. 324 · 1898
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1935
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 United States v. Cruikshank · Durland v. United States · Connors v. United States · United States v. Simmons · United States v. Lacher
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““No indictment found and presented by a grand jury in any district or circuit or other court of the United States shall be deeiped insufficient, nor shall the trial, judgment, or other proceeding thereon be affected by reason of any defect or imperfection in matter of form only, which shall not tend to the prejudice of the defendant.” “This section [1025, E. S.] has almost universally been construed to mean mere matters of form should not avail a criminal, if the bill charges the offense in such a way as to fully inform him of the violation of law with which he is charged, and protect him, in the event of acquittal or conviction, against a second trial for the same offense. Mac-Daniel v. U. S. [C. C. A.] 87 F. 324 .””
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.