Mann v. Tacoma Land Co.’s Empirical Analysis
153 U.S. 273 · 1894
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 19 district · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 141 later decisions (25 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1997 · most notably State of Minnesota v. Ethan Allen Hitchcock (1902), Alaska Pacific Fisheries v. United States (1918)
38 federal appellate · 19 district · 27 state decisions — followed in 10 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 Shively v. Bowlby · Leavenworth Lawrence and Galveston Railroad Company v. United States · Barney v. Keokuk · Newhall v. Sanger · Doolan v. Carr
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 141 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is settled that the general legislation of congress in respect to public lands does not extend to tide lands. There is nothing in the act authorizing the Valentine scrip, or in the circumstances which gave occasion for its passage, to make an exception of the general rule. It provided that the scrip might be located on the unoccupied and unappropriated public lands, but the term ‘public lands’ does not include tide lands. As said in Newhall v. Sanger, 92 U.S. 761 [ 23 L.Ed. 769 ]: ‘The words “public lands” are habitually used in our legislation to describe such as are subject to sale or other disposal under general laws.’ (Citing cases.)””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““All title in and claim to all tide, swamp and overflowed lands patented by the United States: provided, the same is not impeached for fraud.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““* * * The United States, while they hold the country as a territory, having all the powers both of national and of municipal government, may grant, for appropriate purposes, titles or rights in the soil below high water mark of tide waters. But they have never done so by general laws; and, unless in some case of international duty or public exigency, have acted upon the policy, as most in accordance with the interest of the people, and with the objeet for which the territories were acquired, of leaving the administration and disposition of the sovereign rights in navigable waters, and in the soil under them, to the control of the states, respectively, when organized and admitted into the Union. * * * ” (Italics those of this, not the Supreme Court.)”
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.