Chew v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
9 F.2d 348 · 1925
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1973 · most notably Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann (1943), Hewitt v. United States (1940)
44 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 Hyde v. United States · Durland v. United States · United States v. William Rabinowich · Salinger v. Loisel · Crain 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Finally, it may be said generally, in reference to this indictment and the foregoing attacks thereon, that reasonable particularity was all that was required. Brown v. United States, 143 F. 60 , 74 C. C. A. 214 (C. C. A. 8); Horn v. United States, 182 F. 721 -727, 105 C. C. A. 163 (C. C. A. 8). And if the language of the indictment was such that the defendant felt that he was liable to be surprised at the evidence which might be offered, it was his right and duty to apply for a bill of particulars. Rinker v. United States, 151 F. 755 -759, 81 C. C. A. 379 (C. C. A. 8).””
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.