Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 919 F.2d 1223 - United States v. Giovannetti

United States v. Giovannetti’s Empirical Analysis

919 F.2d 1223 · 1990

Citation profile

174
cited by 174 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
March 2020
most recently cited

119 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 174 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2020 · most notably Board of the County Commissioners of Bryan County v. Brown (1997), United States v. Dunkel (1991)

119 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

12001990200020102020decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 1955 · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2

Relies on United States v. Peoni · United States v. Borelli · United States v. Jewell · Sanchez v. Miller

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

  1. “A litigant who fails to press a point by supporting it with pertinent authority, or by showing why it is a good point despite a lack of supporting authority or in the face of contrary authority, forfeits the point.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “mental, as well as a physical effort--a cutting off of one's normal curiosity by an effort of will.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “evidence that the defendant, knowing or strongly suspecting that he is involved in shady dealings, takes steps to make sure that he does not acquire full or exact knowledge of the nature and extent of those dealings.”
    3 later decisions 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.