Samuelson v. Central Nebraska Public Power & Irrigation Dist.’s Empirical Analysis
125 F.2d 838 · 1942
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently March 1995 · most notably Hanson v. Ford Motor Co. (1960), Georgia Power Co. v. 138.30 Acres of Land (1980)
23 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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 Fairmount Glass Works v. Cub Fork Coal Co. · Burnett v. Central Nebraska Public Power & Irrigation Dist. · United States Can Co. v. Ryan
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““As we have indicated in the Burnett case, supra, a jury is never required, in an ordinary condemnation proceeding, to accept as conclusive the estimates of value made by expert witnesses on either side. There ordinarily is in such cases some general testimony as to the location, character, use, etc., of the property, and other pertinent facts usually also are developed on direct or cross-examination of the witnesses. All of this the jury is entitled to consider, together with any reasonable inferences which may be made therefrom, and it may properly exercise its own deliberate judgment on the amount of the damages, from the evidence as a whole, in the light of its common knowledge and ordinary experience, giving to the estimate of the expert witnesses only such weight as it conscientiously feels they are entitled to receive under all the circumstances.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“there is utterly no basis on which it can reasonably rest under the evidence,”
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.