Diamond Coal Coke Company v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
233 U.S. 236 · 1914
Citation profile
53 federal appellate · 25 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 138 later decisions (25 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1983 · most notably Burke v. Southern Pacific Railroad (1914), Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. De Atley (1916)
53 federal appellate · 25 district · 10 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedUnited States v. Diamond Coal & Coke Co. (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on St.louis Smelting and Refining Company v. Kemp. · Maxwell Land-Grant Case · Deffeback v. Hawke · Colorado Coal & Iron Co. v. United States · Davis v. Wiebbold
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 138 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It must appear that at the time of the proceedings which resulted in the patent the land was known to be valuable for minerals; that is to say, it must appear that the known conditions at the time of those proceedings were plainly such as to engender the belief that the land contained mineral deposits of such quality and in such quantity as would render their extraction profitable and . justify expenditures to that end.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The respect due to a patent, the presumption that all the preceding steps required by law were duly observed, and the obvious necessity for stability in titles resting upon those official instruments, require that in suits to annul them the government shah boar the burden of proof, and shall sustain it by that class of evidence which commands respect, and that amount of it which produces conviction. Maxwell Land Grant Case, 121 U. S. 325 , 379 -381, 30 L. Ed. 949 , 958, 959, 7 Sup. Ct. 1015 ; United States v. Iron Silver Min. Co., 128 U. S. 673 , 676, 32 L. Ed. 571 , 572, 9 Sup. Ct. 195 ; United States v. Stinson, 197 U. S. 200 , 201, 205. 49 L. Ed. 724 , 725, 25 Sup. Ct. 426 ; United States v. Clark, 200 U. S. 601 , 608, 50 L. Ed. 613 , 616, 26 Sup. Ct. 340 .” Diamond Coal & Coke Co. v. United States, 233 U. S. 236 , 31 Sup. Ct. 507 , 58 L. Ed. 936 ; United States v. D. C. Beaman & Colorado Realty Holding Co., 242 Fed. 876 , -C. C. A. -— (8th Cir.).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““There is no fixed rule that lands become valuable for coal only through its actual discovery within their boundaries. On the contrary, they may, and often do, become so through adjacent disclosures and other surrounding or external conditions; and when that question arises in cases such as this, any evidence logically relevant to the issue is admissible, due regard being had to the time to which it must relate.””
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.