Ranstead v. The Wm. H. Brinsfield’s Empirical Analysis
39 F. 215 · 1889
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
May 1903
most recently cited
2 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Yates v. Milwaukee · Ex parte Easton · Parkersburg Ohio River Transp Co v. City of Parkersburg · Dutton v. Strong · Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Chase
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is the ease of a riparian owner who has cut a canal into his own land so as to allow vessels to go to his own property fronting on it, and then has disposed of portions of the land to different persons.” Also: “But it does not seem to me the analogy between the use of the waterway of this private basin and the use of a street is very close. The very purpose of the basin is that vessels may lie in it for the private owners of the wharves • abutting on it,” ete. Also: “In the absence of law or lawful custom, as to owners upon a water which is not so much a public navigable highway as it is a private basin, it seems to me the only legal right is that of unobstructed access each to his own wharf.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. The Davidson
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.