United States v.’s Empirical Analysis
307 U.S. 219 · 1939
Citation profile
311 federal appellate · 57 district · 117 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 804 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co. (1974), United States v. United States Coin & Currency (1971)
311 federal appellate · 57 district · 117 state decisions — followed in 21 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
reviewedthe decision below (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on J. W. Goldsmith, Jr.-Grant Co. v. United States · Farmers' & Mechanics' National Bank v. Dearing · Richbourg Motor Co. v. United States · McLemore v. Louisiana State Bank
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 804 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Forfeitures are not favored; they should be enforced only when within both letter and spirit of the law.”
34 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““(b) Conditions precedent to remission or mitigation. In any such proceeding the court shall not allow the claim of any claimant for remission or mitigation unless and until he proves (1) that he has an interest in such vehicle or aircraft, as owner or otherwise, which he acquired in good faith, (2) that he had at no time any knowledge or reason to believe that it was being or would be used in the violation of laws of the United States or of any State relating to liquor, and (3) if it appears that the interest asserted by the claimant arises out of or is in any way subject to any contract or agreement under which any person having a record or reputation for violating laws of the United States or of any State relating to liquor has sc right with respect to such vehicle or aircraft, that, before such claimant acquired his interest, or such other person acquired his right under such contract or agreement, whichever occurred later, the claimant, his officer or agent, was informed in answer to his inquiry, at the headquarters of the sheriff, chief of police, principal Federal internal-revenue officer engaged in the enforcement of the liquor laws, or other principal local or Federal law-enforcement officer of the locality in which such other person acquired his right under such contract or agreement, of the locality in which such other person then re sided, and of each locality in which the claimant has made any other inquiry as to the character or financial standing of such other ”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A wheelbarrow, a covered wagon, a `Rolls-Royce', the patient mule, a `Man of War', and possibly a Pullman car or Ocean Liner is a vehicle.”
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.