Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 9 F.2d 38 - Fry v. United States

Fry v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

9 F.2d 38 · 1925

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
4
states following
December 1981
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 5 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently December 1981

9 federal appellate · 5 district · 6 state decisions

701925193019401950196019701980decided

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 Carroll v. United States · Steele v. United States No. 1 · Giles v. United States · Rose v. United States

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

  1. ““Further objection is based upon the fact that the warrant was executed at night, without positive showing in the affidavit that the liquor was then on the premises to be searched. Answer to the point is that the affidavit of the prohibition agent was positive that one of the defendants stated they had liquor for sale, and that liquor was possessed by defendants in the place to be searched.””
    1 later decision 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.