Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 103 F.2d 503 - Caesar v. Burgess

Caesar v. Burgess’s Empirical Analysis

103 F.2d 503 · 1939

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
3
states following
April 1987
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently April 1987 · most notably United States v. Anglin & Stevenson (1944), In Re Bingaman's Estate (1953)

17 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

210193919401950196019701980decided

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 Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co. · Sutton v. English · Gaines v. Fuentes · Sunderland v. United States · Ellis v. Davis

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

  1. ““1. Whether proceedings for the probate of the estate of a deceased, restricted Indian allottee of the Five Civilized Tribes who is survived by restricted Indian heirs are removable to the federal court under Sec. 3 of the Act of April 12, 1926, 44 Stat. 239 . “2. Whether, if such proceedings are removable, the federal court may exercise complete probate jurisdiction and fully administer the unrestricted estate” (Emphasis supplied)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The suit above described must be one claiming ‘title to or an interest in lands allotted to a citizen of the Five Civilized Tribes or the proceeds, issues, rents and profits derived from the same.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The supreme court of the state (Oklahoma) has held repeatedly that a contested proceeding for the probate of a will is a special proceeding in the nature of an equitable action.””
    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.