Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 132 U.S. 357 - Hastings Co v. Whitney

Hastings Co v. Whitney’s Empirical Analysis

132 U.S. 357 · 1889

Citation profile

297
cited by 297 later decisions
32
cited 32 times by the Supreme Court
21
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

69 federal appellate · 32 district · 88 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 297 later decisions (32 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2015 · most notably Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission (1969), United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co. (1906)

69 federal appellate · 32 district · 88 state decisions — followed in 21 states

80018891890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 De La Fayette Wilcox v. John Jackson · United States v. Moore · Newhall v. Sanger · Witherspoon v. Duncan

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

  1. ““But if. notwithstanding these defects, the application is allowed by the land officers, and a certificate of entry is delivered to the applicant, and the entry is made of record, such entry may be afterwards canceled on account of these defects. * * * But these delects, whether they be of form or- substance, by no means render the entry a nullity. So long as it remains a subsisting entry of record, whose legality has boon passed upon by the land authorities, and their action remains unreversed, it is such an appropriation of the tract as segregates it from the public domain, and therefore precludes it from subsequent grants.””
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The almost uniform practice of the department has been to regard land apon which an entry of record valid upon its face has been made as appropriated and withdrawn from subsequent homestead entry, pre-emption settlement, sale, or grant until the original entry be canceled or declared forfeited, in which case the land reverts to the government as part of the public domain, and becomes again subject to entry under the land laws.””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““The construction given to a statute by those charged with the duty of executing it is always entitled to the most respectful consideration, and ought not to be overruled without cogent reasons. * * * The officers concerned are usually able men, and masters of the subject. Not unfrequently they are the draftsmen of the laws they are afterward called upon to interpret.””
    5 later decisions 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.