Danovitz v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
281 U.S. 389 · 1930
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 30 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1983 · most notably Stoianoff v. Montana (1983), Hamilton Manufacturing Co. v. City of Lowell (1931)
36 federal appellate · 30 district · 3 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedFeitler v. United States (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Katz · Workman v. Boone · Commissioners of Road Improvement District No. 2 v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. · Donnelley 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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“unlawful to have or possess any liquor or property designed for the manufacture of liquor intended for use in violating this chapter or which has been so used.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * But the word may be used in a looser way to express the whole process by which an article is made ready for sale on the open market. * * *”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“that if the empty containers and the other objects seized were offered for sale in such a mode as purposely to attract purchasers who wanted them for the unlawful manufacture, as we interpret the word, they were designed for that manufacture and could be seized.”
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.