Boquillas Land & Cattle Co. v. Curtis’s Empirical Analysis
213 U.S. 339 · 1909
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 8 district · 39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions (20 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1990 · most notably Black & White Taxicab & Transfer Co. v. Brown & Yellow Taxicab & Transfer Co. (1928), United States v. Gerlach Live Stock Co. (1950)
17 federal appellate · 8 district · 39 state decisions — followed in 10 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.
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Rio Grande Dam & Irrigation Co. · Knight v. United Land Ass'n · Shepley v. Cowan · Yates v. Milwaukee · Wisconsin & Michigan Railway Co. v. Powers
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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The plaintiff draws another argument from the effect of the United States patent. It contends that the patent not only confirms the Mexican title, but releases that of the United States (Beard v. Federy, 3 Wall, 478, 491 [ 18 L. Ed. 88, 92 ]), and that, by the grant from the United States, it gained rights as a riparian proprietor that could not be displaced by a subsequent attempt to appropriate the water (Sturr v. Beck, 133 U. S. 541 [ 33 L. Ed. 761 , 10 Sup. Ct. 350]). But, while it is true that in Beard v. Federy, supra, Mr. Justice Field calls such a patent a quitclaim, we think it rather should be described as a confirmation in a strict sense. ... It is not to be understood that when the United States executes a document on the footing of an earlier grant by a former sovereign, it intends or purports to enlarge the grant. ’ ’”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to, or inconsistent with, the constitution and laws of the United States, or the bill of rights or laws of this Territory, is hereby adopted, and shall be the rule of decision in all the courts of this Territory.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“’ “We agree with the territorial court that * * * patentees of a ranch on the San Pedro are” far from having “the same rights as owners of an estate on the Thames.””
2 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.