Northern Lumber Company v. William O'Brien J E’s Empirical Analysis
204 U.S. 190 · 1907
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1981 · most notably Burlingham v. Crouse (1913), Columbia Basin Land Protection Ass'n v. Schlesinger (1981)
13 federal appellate · 5 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedNorthern Lumber Co. v. O'Brien (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on De La Fayette Wilcox v. John Jackson · Leavenworth Lawrence and Galveston Railroad Company v. United States · Schulenberg v. Harriman · St Paul Co v. Northern Pac R Co · Kansas Pacific Railway Co. v. Dunmeyer
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a)ll land, to which any claims or rights of others have attached.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Wismer · Columbia Basin Land Protection Association, Etc., and South Columbia Basin Irrigation District, Plaintiff-Intervenor v. James R. Schlesinger, Etc., Columbia Basin Land Protection Association, Etc., and South Columbia Basin Irrigation District, Plaintiff-Intervenor v. James R. Schlesinger, Etc., Columbia Basin Land Protection Association, Etc., and South Columbia Basin Irrigation District, Plaintiff-Intervenor, and State of Washington and Franklin County, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellants v. James Schlesigner, Etc.““When the withdrawal order ceased to be in force, the lands so withdrawn did not pass under the latter grant, but became a part of the public domain, subject to be disposed of under the general land laws, and not to be claimed under any railroad land grant.””
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.