In Re King Properties’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably Commonwealth v. Real Property & Improvements Commonly Known as 5444 Spruce Street (2003), Commonwealth v. Eisenberg, M., Aplt (2014)
53 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 21 U.S.C. § 881 (§ 511 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Austin v. United States · Commonwealth v. Zettlemoyer · Commonwealth v. Edmunds
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f the forfeited property was significantly used in the commission of the offense, the item may be forfeited regardless of its value.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“But an in rem forfeiture goes beyond the traditional limits that the Eighth Amendment permits if it applies to property that cannot properly be regarded as an instrumentality of the offense — the building, for example, in which an isolated drug sale happens to occur. Such a confiscation would be an excessive fine.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“(a) Forfeitures generally. — The following shall be subject to forfeiture to the Commonwealth and no property right shall exist in them: (6)(i) All of the following: (C) Real property used or intended to be used to facilitate any violation of the Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act”
2 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.