Dixon v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
211 F.2d 547 · 1954
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1985 · most notably United States v. Kahn (1974), Harold Hanger v. United States of America, Gale Mixen v. United States of America, Loretta Meyer v. United States (1968)
13 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
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 Steele v. United States No. 1 · Skiskowski v. United States · United States v. Old Dominion Warehouse, Inc. · Gracie v. United States · United States v. McKay
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Appellant also claims that the search warrant is invalid because it is styled ‘United States v. Search Warrant,’ appel lant’s name not being stated. Though desirable, it is not essential to the validity of a search warrant that the owner or occupant of the premises be named. U. S. v. Fitzmaurice, 2 Cir., 45 F. 133 ; U. S. v. Leach, D. C., 24 F. 2d 965 .””
2 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.