Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 243 F.2d 660 - Work v. United States

Work v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

243 F.2d 660 · 1957

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
13
states following
March 1998
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently March 1998 · most notably 71 Cal. 2d 1096 - People v. Edwards (1969), 59 Cal. 2d 713 - People v. Haven (1963)

21 federal appellate · 1 district · 24 state decisions — followed in 13 states

23019571960197019801990decided

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. § 3109

Relies on Carroll v. United States · Brinegar v. United States · Johnson v. United States · Boyd v. United States · United States v. Rabinowitz

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

  1. ““The Fourth Amendment was designed to safeguard the individual’s right of privacy in his home and in his personal effects against arbitrary intrusion by government officials. I cannot find a fundamental constitutional right to privacy in the garbage or trash pail of a rooming house where the receptacle is located out of doors in sight from the street and where there is an admitted constant invitation to the public authorities of the District to remove the contents as refuse. * * * ” Work v. United States, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 237 , 243 F.2d 660, 663 (1957).”
    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.