Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 233 U.S. 613 - Logan v. Davis

Logan v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

233 U.S. 613 · 1914

Citation profile

235
cited by 235 later decisions
45
cited 45 times by the Supreme Court
15
states following
January 2008
most recently cited

86 federal appellate · 18 district · 41 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 235 later decisions (45 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2008 · most notably McKart v. United States (1969), Norwegian Nitrogen Products Co. v. United States (1933)

86 federal appellate · 18 district · 41 state decisions — followed in 15 states

8301914192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Bement Sons v. National Harrow Company · Murdock v. City of Memphis · Stanley v. Schwalby · United States v. Moore · Hastings Co v. Whitney

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 235 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Many thousands of acres have been patented to individuals under that interpretation, and to disturb it now would be productive of serious and harmful results. The situation, therefore, calls for the application of the settled rule that the practical interpretation of an ambiguous or uncertain statute by the executive department charged with its administration is entitled to the highest respect, and, if acted upon for a number of years, will not be disturbed except for very cogent reasons.””
    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.