United States v. Approximately Acres of Real Property Located at Highway North Fort Drum Okeechobee County Florida’s Empirical Analysis
920 F.2d 900 · 1991
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 881 (§ 511 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Bonner v. City of Prichard · United States v. A Single Family Residence · United States v. Santoro · United States v. Premises Known as 3639-2nd St., N.E. · United States v. One Parcel of Real Estate Commonly Known as 916 Douglas Avenue
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“more than an incidental or fortuitous connection”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[However, t]he United States Courts of Appeals disagree on what the government must show to prove probable cause for forfeiture of real property under section 881(a)(7). The First, Fourth, and Eighth Circuits hold that the government must prove that the real property had a “substantial connection” to the illegal activity.... The Seventh Circuit, on the other hand, has rejected the substantial connection test, and instead requires the government to show only that the real property had “more than an incidental or fortuitous connection” to the crime.”
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.