State v. Aslesen’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 state decisions

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

1. ““Many of them, like cottolene, may be entirely wholesome, but, in this day of the common adulteration of articles of food, others may be composed of deleterious ingredients. And what may be wholesome for one person may be unwholesome for another. Moreover, it is also a matter of common knowledge that, whether well founded or not, there is a popular prejudice against certain ingredients in an article of food. This is so, for example, with cotton-seed oil. Many would not purchase or use a lard substitute of which that oil was an ingredient, or any article of food prepared with it. In view of all these facts, the legislature has seen fit to require the seller of these lard substitutes to label the article which he sells with what, for convenience, we may call a quantitative analysis of its ingredients, and to require the seller of any article of food prepared with such lard substitute to give notice of the fact to the purchaser, so that he may know just what he is buying. This certainly does not deprive the seller of his property without due process of law. ’ No man has a constitutional right to keep secret the composition of substances which he sells to the public as articles of food.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hanson