Pickerill v. Schott’s Empirical Analysis
1951
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably 120 So. 2d 596 - Port Everglades Terminal Co. v. Canty (1960), 5 Cal. 3d 402 - California Beer Wholesalers Ass'n v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board (1971)
2 federal appellate · 24 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
Relies on State v. Zazzaro · State ex rel. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Board of Equalizers · 50 So. 2d 179 - Foley v. State Ex Rel. Gordon · Sepe v. Daneker · James J. Sullivan, Inc. v. Cann's Cabins, Inc.
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“They [the appellants] asked for a hearing before the Beverage Director to determine the constitutionality of the Act. There was no duty placed upon the Beverage Director to grant a hearing to the appellants on this question. Not only is it true that the Beverage Director was under no duty but he had no right to grant any such hearing. It was the duty of the Beverage Director to observe the law as he found it until in a proper proceeding its constitutionality is judicially passed upon. See State ex rel. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. State Board of Equalizers, 84 Fla. 592 , 94 So. 681 , 30 A.L.R. 362 ; City of Pensacola v. King, Fla., 47 So.2d 317, 318 ; Steele v. Freel, 157 Fla. 223 , 25 So.2d 501 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the legislature has determined that this regulation is in the public interest and is a proper exercise of the police power. There is nothing unreasonable or arbitrary about this regulation, and there was no abuse of legislative discrimination”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“to prevent the integration of retail and wholesale outlets and to remove retail dealer in intoxicating liquors from financial or business obligations to the wholesaler, with the exception of ordinary commercial credit for liquors sold.”
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.