Lamb v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 9 state decisions

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

1. ““The provisions of the act of Congress approved’March 1, 1901 ( 31 Stat. 861 ), in so far as they provide for descent and distribution according to the laws of the Creek Nation, are hereby repealed and the descent and distribution of land and money provided for by said act shall be in accordance with chapter 49 of Mansfield’s Digest of the Statutes of Arkansas now in force in Indian Territory: Provided, That only citizens of the Creek Nation, male and female,' and their Creek descendants shall inherit lands of the Creek Nation: And provided further, that if there he no person of Creek citizenship to take the descent and distribution of said estate, then the inheritance shall go to non-citizen heirs in the order named in said chapter 49.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Carter Oil Co. v. Scott

2. ““The meaning of the first proviso of section 6, standing alone and unaffected by the second, proviso, is not susceptible of much doubt or debate. Members or citizens of the Creek Nation may inherit and the Creek descendants of such members —that is, their descendants of Creek blood — may inherit, in the order provided in chapter 49 of Mansf. Dig. [Ind. T. Ann. St. 1899, c. 21].””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hughes Land Co. v. Bailey

3. ““If every part of the first proviso of said section 6 be given meaning according to the plain terms of.its language, no such result follows. The second proviso was not introduced, in our opinion, to qualify or restrict the meaning of the first one, but to provide for a line of descent when no heirs of the classes ■named in the first proviso exist.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hughes Land Co. v. Bailey