Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 332 NW2D 237 - Young v. Hamilton

Young v. Hamilton’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
May 2013
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 2013

7 state decisions

301983199020002010decided

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 Armstrong v. Francis Corp. · Enderson v. Kelehan · Sheehan v. Flynn · Jones v. Boeing Company · City of Fargo, Cass County v. State

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

  1. “(a) There is a reasonable necessity for such drainage; (b) If reasonable care be taken to avoid unnecessary injury to the land receiving the burden; (c) If the utility or benefit accruing to the land drained reasonably outweighs the gravity of the harm resulting to the land receiving the burden; and (d) If, where practicable, it is accomplished by reasonably improving and aiding the normal and natural system of drainage according to its reasonable carrying capacity, or if, in the absence of a practicable natural drain, a reasonable and feasible artificial drainage system is adopted.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “waters from rain, springs, or melting snow which lie or flow on the surface of the earth, but which do not form part of a well-drained body of water or natural watercourse.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.