State v. Bollenbach’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably State v. Thompson (1966), Youngstown Mines Corp. v. Prout (1963)
39 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. United States Gypsum Co. · United States v. Appalachian Electric Power Co. · United States v. Holt State Bank · United States v. Oregon · United States v. Utah
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The rule long since approved by this Court in applying the Constitution and laws of the United States is that streams or lakes which are navigable in fact must be regarded as navigable in law; that they are navigable in fact when they are used, or are susceptible of being used, in their natural and ordinary condition, as highways for commerce, over which trade and travel are or may be conducted in the customary modes of trade and travel on water; and further that navigability does not depend on the particular mode in which such use is or may be had— whether by steamboats, sailing vessels or flatboats — nor on an absence of occasional difficulties in navigation, but on the fact, if it be a fact, that the stream in its natural and ordinary condition affords a channel for useful commerce. The Montello, 20 Wall. 430, 439 ; United States v. Cress, 243 U.S. 316, 323 ; Economy Light & Power Co. v. United States, 256 U.S. 113, 121 ; Oklahoma v. Texas, 258 U.S. 574, 586 ; Brewer-Elliott Oil & Gas Co. v. United States, supra, p. 86.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bunkowski“* * * Every inland lake or pond that has the capacity to float a boat is not necessarily navigable. It must be of such size and so situated as to be generally and commonly useful as a highway for transportation of goods or passengers between the points connected thereby. It must either alone or in connection with other bodies of water connect points between which it is practical to transport commerce by water.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Adams“* * * The susceptibility of a body of water for use as a highway for useful commerce is determined mainly by two factors: (1) Whether the body of water has physical characteristics which permit and are conducive to water travel; and (2) whether the body of water is situated in a location useful to commercial trade and travel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Adams
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.