Wisconsin Cent Co v. Price County’s Empirical Analysis
133 U.S. 496 · 1890
Citation profile
72 federal appellate · 17 district · 99 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 340 later decisions (53 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2014 · most notably United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co. (1906), Utah Power Light Company v. United States No 202 United States (1917)
72 federal appellate · 17 district · 99 state decisions — followed in 26 states
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 Van Brocklin v. Anderson · Leavenworth Lawrence and Galveston Railroad Company v. United States · Schulenberg v. Harriman · Railroad Companies v. Schutte
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 340 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“action of the Secretary [is] required, not merely as supervisory of the action of the agent of the state, but for the protection of the United States against an improper appropriation of their lands.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The subsequent issue of the patent by the United States was not essential •to the right of the company to those parcels, although in many respects they would have been of great service to it. They would have served to identify the land as coterminous with the road completed. They would have been evidence that the grantee had complied with the conditions of the grant, and to ‘that extent that the grant was relieved of possibility of forfeiture for breach of them. They would have obviated the necessity of any other evidence of the grantee’s right to the lánds, and they would have been evidence that the lands were subject to the disposal of the railroad company with the consent of the government. They would have been in these respects deeds of further assurance of the patentee’s title, and therefore a source of quiet and peace to it in its possessions.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The grant was therefore, until such location a float. But when the route of the road was definitely fixed the sections granted became susceptible of identification, and the title attached to them and took effect as of the date of the grant so as to cut off all intervening claims.””
3 later decisions 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.