State of Maryland v. State of West Virginia’s Empirical Analysis
217 U.S. 1 · 1910
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 5 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2014 · most notably State of Arkansas v. State of Tennessee (1918), New Jersey v. New York (1998)
6 federal appellate · 5 district · 18 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.
Relationships
Relies on The State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantationss v. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts · State of Virginia v. State of Tennessee · United States v. Stone · State of Louisiana v. State of Mississippi · State of Indiana v. State of Kentucky
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The evidence is sufficient to show that Virginia, from the earliest period of her history, used the south bank of the Potomac as if the soil to low-water mark had been her own. She did not give this up by her Constitution of 1776, when she surrendered other claims within the charter limits of Maryland; but, on the contrary, she expressly reserved ‘the property of the Virginia shores or strands bordering on either of said rivers (Potomac or Pocomoke) and all improvements which have or will be made thereon/ By the compact of 1785, Maryland assented to this, and declared that ‘the citizens of each state respectively shall have full property on the shores of the Potomac, and adjoining their lands, with all emoluments and advantages thereunto belonging, and the privilege of making and carrying out wharves and other improvements/ * * * “Taking all together, we consider it established that Virginia has a proprietary right on the south shore to low^water mark, and, appurtenant thereto, has a privilege to erect any structures connected with the shore which, may be necessary to the full enjoyment of her riparian ownership, and which •shall not impede the free navigation or other common use of the river as a public highway. “To that extent Virginia has shown her rights on the river so clea,rly as to make them, indisputable.” (Italics ours.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to the farther bank of the said [Potomac] river and following it,”
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.