Winters v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
207 U.S. 564 · 1908
Citation profile
282 federal appellate · 123 district · 224 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 904 later decisions (47 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2024 · most notably Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States (1976), Arizona v. California (1983)
282 federal appellate · 123 district · 224 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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
reviewedthe decision below (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on The Cherokee Nation v. The State of Georgia · United States v. Lineas Winans · Forgay v. Conrad · United States v. Rio Grande Dam & Irrigation Co.
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 904 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“By a rule of interpretation of agreements and treaties with the Indians, ambiguities occurring will be resolved from the standpoint of the Indians. And the rule should certainly be applied to determine between two inferences, one of which would support the purpose of the agreement and the other impair or defeat it. On account of their relations to the government, it cannot be supported that the Indians were alert to exclude by formal words every inference which might militate against or defeat the declared purpose of themselves and the government.]”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“And this, it is further contended, the Indians knew [that the lands were arid], and yet made no reservation of the waters. We realize that there is a conflict of implications, but that which makes for the retention of the waters is of greater force than that which makes for their cession. The Indians had command of the lands' and the waters — command of all their beneficial use, whether kept for hunting, “and grazing roving herds of stock,” or turned to agriculture and the arts of civilization. Did they give up all this? Did they reduce the area of their occupation and give up the waters which made it valuable or adequate?”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The rule which requires the parties to a judgment or decree to join in an appeal or writ of error, or be detached from the right by some proper proceeding, or by their renunciation, is firmly established. But the rule only applies to joint judgments or decrees. In other words, when the interest of a defendant is separate from that of other defendants he may appeal without them.””
4 later decisions 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.