Maddox v. Burnham’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““This claim of the defendant cannot be sustained. At the time of these transactions the mere occupation of land, with a purpose at some subsequent time of entering it for a homestead, gave to the party so entering no rights. The law in force (Act May 20, 1862, c. 75, 12 Stat. 392 ), made the entry of the land office the initial fact. Section 1 authorized any one possessed of the prescribed qualifications ‘to enter one quarter section, or a less quantity, of unappropriated public lands.’ Section 2 provided that the person applying should, upon his application, make affidavit, among other things, ‘that such application is made for his or her exclusive use and benefit, and that said entry is made for the purpose of actual settlement and cultivation, * * * and upon filing the said affidavit with the register or receiver, and on payment of $10, he or she shall thereupon be permitted to enter the quantity of lands specified.’ So the law stood until May 14, 1880 ( 21 Stat. 141 , c. 89 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1393]), when an act was passed, the third section of which is as follows: ‘See. 3. That any settler who has settled, or who shall hereafter settle, on any of the public lands of the United States, whether surveyed or unsurveyed, with the intention of claiming the same under the homestead laws, shall be allowed the same time to” file his homestead application and perfect his original entry in the United States land office, as is now allowed to settlers under the pre-emption law”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Trodick v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.

2. ““It cannot bo that when he fails, even by reason of his poverty, to do that which the law prescribed as the initiation of any rights in the land, he is nevertheless entitled to the same protection which he would receive had he complied with the statute. Leniently as the conduct of a settler is always regarded by the courts, it cannot he that such leniency will tolerate the omission by him of any of the substantial requirements of the statute in respect to the creation of rights in the public lands.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Central Pac. R.

3. ““In the year 1866 the mere occupation of public land, with a purpose at some subsequent time of entering it for a homestead, gave the party so occupying no rights.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. United States v. Bagnell Timber Co.