Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 193 F.2d 287 - United States v. Chabot

United States v. Chabot’s Empirical Analysis

193 F.2d 287 · 1951

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
March 1991
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently March 1991

9 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

5019511960197019801990decided

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. § 95A · 19 U.S.C. § 1581 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 22 U.S.C. § 401 (§ 1 of the Espionage Act of 1917)

Relies on 30 F. Supp. 466 - Murphy v. Cady · Landau v. United States Attorney for Southern District of New York · Farber v. United States · Wong Shong Been v. Proctor · Olson 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The car had already been delivered, along with the keys, to the freight agent; it was parked alongside the pier when the customs men began to inspect it. The right of customs officials to inspect cargo being shipped abroad at a port of embarkation is apparent . . . (citations omitted) Here, the car was heavily weighted down in the rear without any apparent cause. The fenders, upon tapping, sounded peculiar. The car, in such obviously bad condition, was being shipped abroad. This seems to us sufficient cause to authorize a more thorough and even dismantling search of the car, for possible secret exports. See 22 U.S. C.A. § 401. Both 19 U.S.C.A. § 1581 and 22 U.S.C.A. § 401 seem to dispense with the necessity of a search warrant in such circumstances. Id. at 290-91 (emphasis added).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Any gold withheld, acquired, transported, melted, or treated, imported, exported, or earmarked or held in custody in violation of this Act or of any regulations issued hereunder, or licenses issued pursuant thereto, shall be forfeited to the United States, and may be seized and condemned by like proceedings as those provided by law for the forfeiture, seizure, and condemnation of property imported into the United States contrary to law; and in addition any person failing to comply with the provisions of this Act or of any such regulations or licenses, shall be subject to a penalty equal to twice the value of the gold in respect of which such failure occurred.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Whenever an attempt is made to export or ship from or take out of the United States any arms or munitions or other articles in violation of law, or whenever it is known or there shall be probable cause to believe that any arms or munitions of war or other articles are intended to be or are being or have been exported or removed from the United States in violation of law, the Secretary of the Treasury, or any person duly authorized for the purpose by the President, may seize and detain such arms or munitions of war or other articles * * *. (Emphasis supplied.)”
    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.