See v. City of Seattle’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
1,041 federal appellate · 265 district · 1,668 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4,185 later decisions (166 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Terry v. Ohio (1968), United States v. Leon (1984)
1,041 federal appellate · 265 district · 1,668 state decisions — followed in 49 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.
Relationships
Relies on Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States · Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco · Edwin Hale v. William Henkel · United States v. Morton Salt Co.
Cited together with Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco · Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc. · Katz v. United States · Terry v. Ohio · United States v. Biswell
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 4,185 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“probable cause justifying the issuance of a warrant may be based not only on specific evidence of an existing violation but also on a showing that 'reasonable legislative or administrative standards for conducting an ... inspection are satisfied with respect to a particular (establishment).'”
52 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
38 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“sufficiently limited in scope, relevant in purpose, and specific in directive so that compliance will not be unreasonably burdensome.”
31 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.