United States v. Ingram’s Empirical Analysis
203 F.2d 91 · 1953
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 33 U.S.C. § 491 · 33 U.S.C. § 495
Relies on United States v. Appalachian Electric Power Co. · Economy Light & Power Co. v. United States · President Managers and Company of the Monongahela Bridge Company v. United States · Miller v. Mayor Etc of the City of New York · The Binghamton Bridge
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Here, there is neither indication nor ambiguity in the statute as a warrant for any judicial dealing with bridge modification, any more than with bridge erection, as a question of obstruction to navigation * * * Deviation from ‘any plans * * * approved,’ except upon the basis prescribed in the grant constituted a violation of the statute, whether done during or done after the building of the bridge.””
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.