Smith v. Katzenbach’s Empirical Analysis
351 F.2d 810 · 1965
Citation profile
39 federal appellate · 11 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2005 · most notably United States v. Kordel (1970), Nuesse v. Camp (1967)
39 federal appellate · 11 district · 4 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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 28 U.S.C. § 507
Relies on Gulf Oil Corporation v. Gilbert · Bell v. Hood · Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp. · Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrath · Land US v. Dollar
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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'a crystallization of a principle of equity jurisdiction.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(e) Motion for Return of Property. A person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure or by the deprivation of property may move the district court for the district in which the property was seized for the return of the property on the ground that such person is entitled to lawful possession of the property. The court shall receive evidence on any issue of fact necessary to the decision of the motion. If the motion is granted, the property shall be returned to the movant, although reasonable conditions may be imposed to protect access and use of the property in subsequent proceedings. If a motion for return of property is made or comes on for hearing in the district of trial after an indictment or information is filed, it shall be treated also as a motion to suppress under Rule 12.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(to) reach forward to control the improper preparation of evidence which is to be used in a case coming before it, and . .. by summary procedure (to) restrain oppressive or unlawful conduct of its own officers,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Meier v. Keller
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.