Cobell v. Norton’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Gulf Oil Co. v. Bernard · Kleiner v. First National Bank · School District of Lancaster Manheim Township School District v. Lake Asbestos of Quebec, Ltd. · Hams v. Cleveland Metal Abrasive, Inc · Impervious Paint Industries, Inc. v. Ashland
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If you have concerns about the Historical Statement of Account included with this letter or if you believe it is in error, yo[u] may wish to file a challenge with OHTA [the Office of Historical Trust Accounting] .... If you do not challenge the historical account statement or request an extension within 60 calendar days of the postmark on the envelope containing this letter, the enclosed Historical Statement of Account will be final and cannot be appealed.... You may appeal OHTA’s final response to the Interior Board of Indian Appeals (IBIA) by filing a Notice of Appeal with IBIA within 30 calendar days of the date you receive OHTA’s response, [emphasis in original].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cobell v. Norton“The instant Order does not prohibit defendants from communicating with class members in the ordinary course of business on routine matters unrelated to the instant litigation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cobell v. Norton
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.