Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 OR 319 - State v. Hawk

State v. Hawk’s Empirical Analysis

1922

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
3
states following
July 1980
most recently cited

2 district · 22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently July 1980

2 district · 22 state decisions

701922193019401950196019701980decided

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 City of Cincinnati v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad · Water Works Co. v. Burkhart · Simmons v. Winters · South Park Commissioners v. Dunlevy · Minnesota Canal & Power Co. v. Koochiching Co.

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

  1. “"The following streams and waters thereof forming waterfalls in view of, or near, the Columbia River Highway, from Sandy River to Hood River, are hereby withdrawn from appropriation or condemnation, and shall not be diverted or interrupted for any purpose whatsover, except as hereinafter mentioned, to-wit: * * * Herman Creek. * * * All in Hood River County." (Italics added.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “"It seems to us that the act of 1915 [§ 7113, Oregon Laws], is a plain revocation of authority for the condemnation of land in connection with, or bordering upon the streams mentioned in the act. * * * The statute [§ 7089, Oregon Laws] did not authorize this condemnation proceeding."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “"This act shall not prevent the condemnation for public park purposes of any lands through which any of said streams flow, nor affect vested rights or the rights of riparian proprietors of such lands in, or to the waters of said creeks or streams."”
    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.