Tuck v. Sanders’s Empirical Analysis
1925
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently October 1941
5 state decisions
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 Sunderland v. United States · Griffin v. Culp · F. B. Collins Inv. Co. of Clinton v. Beard · Brewer v. Dodson · Salmon v. Johnson
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . Certainly, an inherited interest of an unrestricted minor mixed blood Indian heir in lands allotted to his deceased ancestor, is ‘property’ in its general sense, but it cannot be contended that it constitutes property, within the meaning of the term as employed in section 6, supra, when the court holds that it is not necessary to resort to the probate court in order to divest such heir of his interest therein. . . . “We have heretofore pointed out in this opinion that this rule with reference to inherited lands has been overruled, where the heirs were mixed blood Indians, including minors. . . .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hardesty v. Gordon
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.