Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 211 F.2d 1 - United States v. Willis

United States v. Willis’s Empirical Analysis

211 F.2d 1 · 1954

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
states following
July 1983
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently July 1983

14 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

801954196019701980decided

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 33 U.S.C. § 701C · 33 U.S.C. § 701C

Relies on United States v. Carmack · United States v. Meyer · Simmonds v. United States · United States v. New York

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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The facts uncontrovertibly show that the action of the Secretary of the Army and the Corps of Engineers in this case was without ‘adequate determining principle or was unreasoned.’ The action was without ‘adequate determining principle’ because they did not follow the same principle that was followed in other tracts in the same community as well as in the entire reservoir. And, such action ‘was unreasoned’ because they utterly disregarded the location of the land and the admitted fact that it would never be inundated; that it was a compact tract; that standing alone it was an economic unit, aside from its use with other adjoining land in Missouri owned by defendant; that there were ample means of ingress and egress; that it was not a remnant or portion of a tract but was an entire tract and a separate unit in itself. “Therefore, the judgment of the Court entered at the time the petition and declaration of taking were filed should be set aside and the petition and declaration of taking of the government as to tract 0-1468 dismissed, and the title revested in defendant as against the United States of America.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The tract could well be, as the Government says, an excellent vantage point for supervision of the reservoir. And, on the other hand, if left in private hands, it could perhaps give rise to difficulties of sedimentation and control of activities, in relation to the lake itself, as well as problems for the school, police, fire and other systems of the State of Arkansas. ’ ’”
    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.