Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 37 OHIOST3D 310 - State v. VFW Post 3562

State v. VFW Post 3562’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
1
states following
March 2012
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably State v. Posey (1988), Stone v. City of Stow (1992)

1 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

2401988199020002010decided

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

Relies on Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc. · New York v. Burger · United States v. Biswell · Colonnade Catering Corp. v. United States · Donovan v. Dewey

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

  1. “R.C. 4301.10(A)(4), (6), and (7) and Ohio Adm. Code 4301 : 1 - 1 - 53 are unconstitutional insofar as they fail to establish time, place, and scope limitations on warrantless administrative searches of liquor establishments by agents of the Department of Liquor Control.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Evidence obtained as a result of a warrantless administrative search may not be used in a criminal prosecution under a statute of general criminality not related to provisions of R.C. Chapters 4301 and 4303.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[i]nspect, upon demand, the books, accounts, records, memorandums, and place of business of any [liquor establishment].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.