Minnesota v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
305 U.S. 382 · 1939
Citation profile
436 federal appellate · 161 district · 64 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,202 later decisions (76 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2023 · most notably United States v. Sherwood (1941), United States v. Mitchell (1983)
436 federal appellate · 161 district · 64 state decisions — followed in 20 states
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
reviewedUnited States v. Minnesota (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Utah Power Light Company v. United States No 202 United States · Lambert Run Coal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad · General Inv Co v. Lake Shore & M S Ry Co · State of Minnesota v. Ethan Allen Hitchcock
Cited together with United States v. Sherwood · United States v. Shaw · Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp. · Lambert Run Coal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad · Dugan v. Rank
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 1,202 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a)s the parcels here in question were restricted lands, the interest of the United States continues throughout the condemnation proceedings.”
27 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“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.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to grant permission, upon compliance with such requirements as he may deem necessary, to the proper State or local authorities for the opening and establishment of public highways, in accordance with the laws of the State or Territory in which the lands are situated, through any Indian reservation or through any lands which have been allotted in severalty to any individual Indian under any laws or treaties but which have not been conveyed to the allottee with full power of alienation. Mar. 3, 1901, c. 832, § 4, 31 Stat. 1084 .” “The Attorney General, whenever he deems it advantageous to the Government and upon such terms and conditions as he deems advisable, is hereby authorized on behalf of the United States to grant to any State, or any agency or political subdivision thereof, easements in and rights-of-way over lands belonging to the United States which are under his supervision and control * *”
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.