Rooney v. Barnette’s Empirical Analysis
200 F. 700 · 1912
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently December 1965
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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
Relies on Reynolds v. States · St.louis Smelting and Refining Company v. Kemp. · Belk v. Meagher · Erhardt Boaro · Clipper Mining Company v. Eli Mining Land Company
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The location of mineral ground gives to the locator before discovery, and while he complies with the statutes of the United States and the state and local rules and regulations, the valuable right of possession against all intruders, and this right he can convey to another. “ ‘Mineral ground covered by a valid location becomes segregated from the public domain, and is the property of the locator; and, so long as the locator complies with the laws of the United States and the state and local regulations, such locator has the exclusive right and enjoyment to all the surface included within the lines of the location against all the world, and during such time such ground so segregated is not open to location by another, and any relocation of such ground during such time is void.’ Syllabus by the Court in Swanson v. Kettler, 17 Idaho, 321 , 105 P. 1059 , affirmed by the Supreme Court in Swanson v. Sears, 224 U. S. 180 , 32 S. Ct. 455 , 56 L. Ed. 721 ; Becker v. Long (C. C. A.) 196 F. 721 ; Miller v. Chrisman, 140 Cal. 440 , 450, 73 P. 1083 , 74 P. 444 , 98 Am. St. Rep. 63 . ‘’‘It follows that in any view of the fact of discovery, whether made by Hastings or Stafford, the former had the right of possession, which he could convey to the latter, and by such conveyance the latter could acquire the right of possession to the ground in controversy.””
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.