United States v. Narvaez’s Empirical Analysis
995 F.2d 759 · 1993
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 3664 · 18 U.S.C. § 666 · 28 U.S.C. § 991
Relies on California v. ARC America Corp. · Kuntz v. City of Dayton · Cimo v. Petty · Continental Casualty Co. v. UNR Industries, Inc. · United States v. Townsend
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“properly reflected the amount stolen in furtherance of the [scheme].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.