Vance v. Burbank’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

31 federal appellate · 17 district · 49 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 201 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It bas also been settled that the fraud in respect to which relief will be granted in this class of cases must be such as has been practiced on the unsuccessful party, and prevented him from exhibiting his case fully to the department, so that it may properly be said there has never been a decision in a real contest about the subject-matter of inquiry. False testimctay or forged documents even are not enough, if the disputed matter has actually been presented to or considered by the appropriate tribunal.””

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Minor · United States v. White

2. ““The question in dispute is one of fact; that is to say, whether Scott, when he demanded Iris patent and certificate as against the other contesting claimants, had resided on and cultivated the lands in dispute for four consecutive years, and had otherwise conformed to the requirements of the donation act. This was to be determined by the Land Department, and as there was contest, the contending parties were called on in the usual way to make * * * proofs. They appeared, and full opportunity was given Scott to be heard. He presented his evidence and was beaten, after having taken the case through by successive stages on appeal to the Secretary of the Interior. This, in the absence of fraud, is conclusive on all questions of fact. We have many times so decided.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Abbott v. Perry

3. ““The operative allegation in this bill is of false testimony only. That testimony Scott had full opportunity of meeting. Rehearings were granted him when the case seemed to require it, and he took all the appeals the law gave. ® * * As to the alleged fraud in the description of the compromise line, it is sufficient to say that, according to the bill, this fraud, if it in fact existed, was discovered long before the contest in the land department, and if it had any importance in the case the amplest opportunity was given to show the error and get relief against the agreement.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Callicotte