Midland Valley R. v. Sutter’s Empirical Analysis
28 F.2d 163 · 1928
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently August 2013
8 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 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.
Relationships
Relies on Akron Ry Co v. United States · Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. · United States & Interstate Commerce Commission v. Abilene & Southern Railway Co. · Dayton-Goose Creek Railway Co. v. United States, Interstate Commerce Commission · Western Union Telegraph Company v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * The decisions of the national courts and of a majority of the state jurisdictions, however, are to the effect that the railroad company is entitled to the exclusive use and possession of its right of way, and that the owner of the servient estate has no right to occupy the surface of the land conveyed for right of way, in any mode, or for any purpose, without the railroad company's consent. * * *”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““One whose property is subjected to condemnation for railway or other public uses is hone the less the owner of the fee and holder of the ultimate title. He has what the law calls the servient estate. The party for whose use the condemnation was made has what is called the dominant estate. . . . If the railway at Osborne should be abandoned or relocated elsewhere than on plaintiff’s property the dominant estate would terminate and the defendant’s right acquired by condemnation would terminate and revert to the plaintiff.” (pp. 372, 373.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he owner of the fee may not use any portion of the right of way either in the immediate use of the railroad company or necessary to the safe and convenient use of that which is in actual service.”
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.