Attocknie v. Udall’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1989
4 federal appellate ·
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
Applies 25 U.S.C. § 371 · 25 U.S.C. § 373 · 5 U.S.C. § 1009
Relies on Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Rochester Telephone Corporation v. United States · Best v. Humboldt Placer Mining Co. · Cameron v. United States
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[P]roof of a change of attitude [toward paternity] is not ... evidence of an insane delusion. Further, it is equally absurd to suggest that the inconsistency between the language in the will and the original findings of fact tends to prove an 'insane delusion.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Akers v. Hodel“I leave nothing to Willis Attocknie because he is not my son.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Akers v. Hodel
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.