146 Wis. 2d 741 - State v. Big John’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably 223 Wis. 2d 331 - State v. Armstrong (1999), 153 Wis. 2d 589 - Consolidated Papers, Inc. v. Dorr-Oliver, Inc. (1989)
30 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
Applies 46 U.S.C. § 12301 · 46 U.S.C. § 12302
Relies on White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker · Moe v. Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation · Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones · California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians · New Mexico v. Mescalero Apache Tribe
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the natural tendency to place the burden on the party desiring change; (2) special policy considerations such as those disfavoring certain defenses; (3) convenience; (4) fairness; and (5) the judicial estimate of probabilities.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Accordingly, the Court has formulated a comprehensive preemption inquiry which examines not only the congressional plan, but also the nature of the state, federal, and tribal interests at stake, an inquiry designed to determine whether, in the specific context, the exercise of state authority would violate federal law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“State jurisdiction over on-reservation activities of tribes is preempted if it interferes or is incompatible with federal and tribal interests reflected in federal law, unless the state interests at stake are sufficient to justify the assertion of state authority.”
1 later decision 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.