Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 11 WYO 496 - Willey v. Decker

Willey v. Decker’s Empirical Analysis

1903

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
January 2000
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 3 district · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2000 · most notably State of Arizona v. State of California (1963), State of Wyoming v. State of Colorado (1922)

15 federal appellate · 3 district · 27 state decisions

9019031910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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.

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

  1. ““Accompanying this view that the law of appropriation rests upon the inapplicability of any other rule are statutes or constitutional provisions expressly declaring that the ownership of 'all waters is in the state (or in the public). ‘In this and other jurisdictions, where the common law in respect to the use of water and the right thereto is altogether ignored, there has been ^established, either by judicial decision or statute, or both, as an essential principle, that the water of all natural streams is the property of the public or of the state.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The right acquired to water by an appropriator under our system is of the same character as that defined by the foregoing authorities as an incorporeal hereditament and easement. The consumer under a ditch possesses a like property. He is an appropriator from the natural stream, through the intermediate agency of the ditch, and has the right to have the quantity of water so appropriated flow in the natural stream, and through the ditch, for his use.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““That a valid appropriation of water from a natural stream constitutes an easement in the stream, and that such easement is an incorporeal hereditament, the appropriation being in perpetuity, cannot well be disputed.””
    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.