Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 264 F.2d 614 - Julia Nicodemus and R. H. Spencer v. Washington Water Power Company, a Corporation, United States of America

Julia Nicodemus and R. H. Spencer v. Washington Water Power Company, a Corporation, United States of America’s Empirical Analysis

264 F.2d 614 · 1959

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
2
states following
March 2016
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Lee v. United States (1987), 347 Ill. App. 3d 828 - Mekertichian v. Mercedes-Benz U.S.A., L.L.C. (2004)

21 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

1201959196019701980199020002010decided

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 Minnesota v. United States · Lone Wolf v. Ethan a Hitchcock · Elk v. Wilkins · United States v. Sampson · Pinataro v. Appellate Division of the Supreme Court

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

  1. ““The Secretary of the Interior be, and he is empowered to grant rights-of-way for all purposes, subject to such conditions as. he may prescribe, over and across any lands now or hereafter held in trust by the United States for individual Indians or Indian tribes, communities, bands, or nations, or any lands now or hereafter owned, _ subject to restrictions against alienation, by individual Indians or Indian tribes, communities, bands, or nations, including the lands belonging to the Pueblo Indians in New Mexico, and any other lands heretofore or hereafter acquired or set aside for the use and benefit of the Indians.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Congress, under section 357, expressly authorized the condemnation for any public purpose of lands allotted in severalty to Indians. This is the only subject matter of the section. The section is clear, plain, unambiguous, and there is no difficulty in determining the Congressional intent.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Lands allotted in severalty to Indians may be condemned for any public purpose under the laws of the State or Territory where located in the same manner as land owned in fee may be condemned, and the money awarded as damages shall be paid to the allottee.”
    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.