Hilderbrand v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis
327 F.2d 205 · 1964
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 2010
7 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 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 Williams v. Lee · Seymour v. Superintendent of Washington State Penitentiary · United States v. Bob Celestine · Oyler v. Adams · Slochower v. Board of Higher Education
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Such an impractical pattern of checkerboard jurisdiction was avoided by the plain language of § 1151 and we see no justification for adopting an unwarranted construction of that language where the result would be merely to recreate confusion Congress specifically sought to avoid.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Romero“all land within the limits of any Indian reservation ... notwithstanding the issuance of any patent.”
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.