United States v. O'Connor’s Empirical Analysis
874 F.2d 483 · 1989
Citation profile
23 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably United States v. LeDonne (1994), Kusay v. United States (1995)
23 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
Applies 1 U.S.C. § 1 (Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 2314
Relies on United States v. Lane · Houltin v. United States · United States v. Maze · Bowsher v. Merck & Co. · Unimet Corp. v. United Steelworkers
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There is a general rule that an appeal suspends the power of the court below to proceed further in the cause, except to take such steps as will assist the appellate court in its determination.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[M]ailings and calls which occur after the defendant has obtained the victims' money are in furtherance of the scheme if they facilitate concealment or postpone investigation of the scheme.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining ... property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes, to be transmitted by means of wire ... in interstate ... commerce, any ... signs, signals ... or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”
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.