Sears v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
September 1966
most recently cited
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * The competition [between paragraph 1552 and paragraph 339] is between two different use provisions, for classification of smokers’ articles under paragraph 1552 is also a classification dependent on use. United States v. Dunhill, 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 310 . Articles which are used equally for the convenience of smokers (par. 1552) and as household utensils (par. 339) have been held to be subject to duty under paragraph 1552, on the ground that it is the more specific provision. Baltimore Clipper Importing Co. v. United States, 69 Treas. Dec. 895 , T.D. 48324. [P. 8, emphasis copied.]”
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.