Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 256 U.S. 319 - Blanset v. Cardin

Blanset v. Cardin’s Empirical Analysis

256 U.S. 319 · 1921

Citation profile

131
cited by 131 later decisions
21
cited 21 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

59 federal appellate · 12 district · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 131 later decisions (21 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2014 · most notably Sunderland v. United States (1924), Davis v. United States (1990)

59 federal appellate · 12 district · 28 state decisions

3901921193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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

reviewedBlanset v. Cardin (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Cerecedo Hermanos y Compañia · Jefferson v. Fink · Swigart v. Baker · Jacobs v. Prichard

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

  1. “Our conclusion is the same as that of the Court of Appeals, ‘that it was the intention of Congress that this class of Indians should have the right to dispose of property by will under this act of Congress, free from restrictions on the part of the state as to the portions to be conveyed or as to the objects of the testator’s bounty, provided such wills are in accordance with the regulations and meet the approval of the Secretary of the Interi- or.’”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““And there can be no doubt that the act was the suggestion of the Interior Department, and its construction is an assistant, if not demonstrative criterion, of the meaning and purpose of the act. Swigart v. Baker, 229 U. S. 187 , 33 S. Ct. 645 , 57 L. Ed. 1143 ; Jacobs v. Prichard, 223 U. S. 200 , 32 S. Ct. 289 , 56 L. Ed. 405 ; United States v. Cerecedo Hermanos, 209 U. S. 337 , 28 S. Ct. 532 , 52 L. Ed. 821 . And the regulations of the department are administrative of the act and partake of its legal force.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “in accordance with regulations to: be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior,’’ and that no will “ shall be valid or have any force or effect unless and until it shall have been approved”
    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.