Manuel v. Wulff’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 federal appellate · 17 district · 41 state decisions

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

1. ““When a location is perfected, it has the effect of a grant by the United States of the right of present and exclusive possession.” Manuel v. Wulff, 152 U. S. 505 , 511, 14 Sup. Ct. 651 , 653 ( 38 L. Ed. 532 ).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. O'Connell v. Pinnacle Gold Mines Co. · Trinity Gold Dredging & Hydraulic Co. v. Beaudry

2. ““The objection here rests, however, on the assumption that congress has not intended to confer any estate in respect of claims of this character because the right of purchase and the right of possession are indivisible, and the validity of the location is destroyed on the transfer of the claim to a person nor authorized to keep the location alive. Tibbitts v. Ah Tong, 4 Mont. 536 . 2 Pac. 759 . Of course, the same qualification required in those who may purchase is required as to those who may possess, but that, in our judgment, does not render possessory ríalas any the less property susceptible of distinct ownership, nor involve the consequence that their transfer to unqualified persons would operate a forfeiture eo insianii as for a violation of a continuing condition precedent, so that the removal of the disqualification would not cure the defect. If It could be properly hold that the qualification of his grantee should be regarded as at all a condition annexed to the ownership of the qualified locator, such condition would tie a condition subsequent, and governed by the rule laid down in Schulenberg v. Harriman, 21 Wall. 44 , 22 L. Ed. 551 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lohmann v. Helmer

3. “That the mineral lands of the public domain, both surveyed and unsurveyed, are hereby declared to be free and open to exploration and occupation by all citizens of the United States, and those who have declared their intention to become citizens, subject to such regulations as may be prescribed by law, and subject also to the local customs or rules of miners in the several mining districts, so far as the - same may not be in conflict with the laws' of the United States.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Del Monte Mining & Milling Co. v. Last Chance Mining & Milling Co.