Barnett v. Kunkel’s Empirical Analysis
264 U.S. 16 · 1924
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions (14 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2000 · most notably Puerto Rico v. Russell & Co. (1933), Central Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Mealey (1948)
23 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedBarnett v. Kunkel (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Simon Taylor v. Joe Anderson · Albert Shulthis v. D a McDougal · Shoshone Mining Co. v. Rutter · Metcalf v. City of Watertown · Olivia Hopkins v. Frank Walker
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he mere assertion of a title to land derived to the plaintiffs, under and by virtue of a patent granted by the United States, presents no question which, of itself, confers [federal question] jurisdiction.”
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.