Lansden v. Hart’s Empirical Analysis
168 F.2d 409 · 1948
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 2001
2 federal appellate ·
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 16 U.S.C. § 704 · 44 U.S.C. § 301 · 5 U.S.C. § 1001 · 5 U.S.C. § 1003
Relies on Geer v. State of Connecticut · Magner v. People · American Express Co. v. People · Cochrane v. United States · Bailey v. Holland
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No property rights of plaintiffs are involved in these proceedings inasmuch as no person has any property right in live migratory birds and the withdrawal of the privilege of hunting such birds by Federal and State Governments does not deprive anyone of a property right because no such right exists. Permission to hunt, given from time to time by the Federal and State regulations, is not a grant of property, but merely the grant of a privilege.”
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.