United States v. Curtner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 3 state decisions

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

1. ““There has been no laches on the part of the railroad company. It has been pressing its claim earnestly before the department from the first, and it • could not go any faster than the business and course of procedure of the department permitted. The company could not sue the government. Besides, we do not think Che government is wholly without interest. If these lands are within the statutory grant, the company has earned them by a full performance of its part of the statutory contract, and an absolute, indefeasible right to a patent, unincumbered by any cloud, has vested. The government, in that ease, is legally bound to make a good title. It is legally liable to perform its part of the contract, and issue the patent, as required by the statute. The United States are therefore responsible to the railroad company for.the land, or its full value. By the mistake of their officers, they have put it out of their power to comply with their contract, and they are interested to the full value of the land in setting aside the listing and patents resulting from their mistakes, or having them judicially adjudged inoperative and void, in order that they may relieve themselves from their liability.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Southern Pac. R. Co. v. Stanley

2. “lands claimed under any foreign grant or title,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Curtner v. United States