Crane v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis
245 U.S. 304 · 1917
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 18 district · 132 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 244 later decisions (42 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2006 · most notably Pierce v. Society of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary Same (1925), Wisconsin v. Constantineau (1971)
20 federal appellate · 18 district · 132 state decisions — followed in 34 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedIn re Crane
Relationships
Relies on Mugler v. State of Kansas State of Kansas Tufts · Crowley v. Christensen · Rast v. Van Deman & Lewis Co. · Beer Company v. Massachusetts · James Clark Distilling Company v. Western Maryland Railway Company
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 244 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It must now bo regarded as settled that, on account of their well-known noxious qualities and the extraordinary evils shown by experience commonly to be consequent upon their uso, a state has power absolutely to prohibit manufacture, gift, purchase, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within its borders without violating the guaranties of the Fourteenth Amendment. i: * * As the state has the power above indicated to prohibit, it may adopt such measures as are reasonably appropriate or needful to render exercise of that power effective.””
18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Frick v. Webb · Samuels v. McCurdy“* * * an exercise of the police power of the state, for the protection of the welfare, health, peace, morals and safety of the people of the state, and all its provisions shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of that purpose, and it is declared to be the public policy that the traffic in alcoholic liquors is so affected with a public interest that it should be regulated * * *.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Berge v. Harris · Stepp v. State““It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, company or corporation, its officers or agents .... to have in his or its possession or to transport any intoxicating liquor or alcohol .... ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Moore · Moragne v. State
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.