United States v. Pearson’s Empirical Analysis
231 F. 270 · 1916
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1973
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 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 United States v. Lee · United States v. Kagama · United States v. Rickert · Stanley v. Schwalby · In re Heff
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Personal property issued by the government to Sioux Indians, who live on separate allotments, but maintain their tribal relations, consisting of horses, cattle, and their increase, and farm implements and other property acquired by exchange of such property or otherwise, which is derived directly or indirectly from the government and is used by the Indians on their farms, is not subject to taxation by state authorities. Such property is not absolute property of the Indians, but is held in trust for their benefit by the government for the purpose of carrying out its policy of helping them to be self-sustaining. as is evidenced by Act July 4, 1884, c. 180, 23 Stat. 94 (Comp. St. 1918, § 4121), and Act March 2, 1889, c. 405, § 17, 25 Stat. 895 , which restrict the sale of cattle issued, and their increase, by the Indians to members of their own tribe.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Under this decision the changed forms of the property held in trust, as time brings such changes about in live stock and other personal property of the Indians, even to exchanges between themselves of trust property, are impressed with the trust. Even the substitute takes the nature of the original and is charged with the trust. The authorized sale of trust property by a trustee discharges the property sold from, and charges the proceeds of the sale, in the hands of and under the control of the trustee, with the trust.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“will continue until such time as the United States sees fit to terminate the relation of guardian and ward between itself and the said Indians.”
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.