← 35 F.3d 388 - Native Village of Quinhagak v. United States

Native Village of Quinhagak v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

35 F.3d 388 · 1994

Citation profile

cited by 18 later decisions

states following

March 2003

most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 16 U.S.C. § 3102 · 16 U.S.C. § 3111 · 16 U.S.C. § 3114 · 16 U.S.C. § 3115 · 16 U.S.C. § 3117 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 43 U.S.C. § 1635

Relies on Amoco Production Co. v. Village of Gambell · Hayes v. Lockhart · Grogan v. Garner · In re Disbarment of Schaefer · Johnson v. Brown

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

“The Villages also presented evidence that the federal and state regulations interfere with their way of life and cultural identity_ They needed to prove nothing more in light of the clear congressional directive to protect the cultural aspects of subsistence living. 16 U.S.C. § 3111 (1) [ANILCA § 801(1) ] (“[T]he continuation of the opportunity for subsistence uses by rural residents of Alaska ... is essential to Native physical, economic, traditional, and cultural existence-”).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Totemoff v. State
“the taking on public lands of fish and wildlife for nonwasteful subsistence uses shall be accorded priority over the taking on such lands of fish and wildlife for other purposes. " Id. §§ 3114. Congress expressly protected as subsistence uses "the customary and traditional uses by Alaska residents . . . for direct personal or family consumption as food”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Katie John
“Most subsistence fishing (and most of the best fishing) is in the large navigable waterways rather than in the smaller non-navigable tributaries upstream and lakes where fisherman [sic] have access to less fish.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Katie John

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.