Johnson v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
95 F.2d 813 · 1938
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently October 2013 · most notably United States v. Duncan (1979), Benchwick v. United States (1961)
27 federal appellate · 4 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
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 24
Relies on Hagner v. United States · Evans v. United States · United States v. Britton · Batchelor v. United States · United States v. Britton
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The words 'willfully misapplied' are ... new in statutes creating offenses, and they are not used in describing any offense at common law. They have no settled technical meaning like the word ( ) 'embezzle,' as used in the statutes .... They do not, therefore, of themselves fully and clearly set forth every element of the offense charged. It would not be sufficient simply to aver that the defendant 'willfully misapplied' the funds of the association.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“had knowledge of ... (the named borrowers') financial weakness or of the infirmity of the note.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is settled by the decisions of the courts that the misapplication condemned by the statute is something more than an irregular or improper use of the bank's funds. Fraud must be found * * * ””
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.