Kennerly v. District Court of the Ninth Judicial District of Montana’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
66 federal appellate · 48 district · 202 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 394 later decisions (42 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2022 · most notably McClanahan v. State Tax Commission of Arizona (1973), White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker (1980)
66 federal appellate · 48 district · 202 state decisions — followed in 19 states
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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1162 · 25 U.S.C. § 1321 · 25 U.S.C. § 1322 · 25 U.S.C. § 1323 · 25 U.S.C. § 1326 · 25 U.S.C. § 461 · 28 U.S.C. § 1360
Relies on Williams v. Lee · State Ex Rel. Kennerly v. District Court · Williams v. Lee
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 394 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““§ 1360. State civil jurisdiction in actions to which Indians are parties “(a) [California] . . . shall have jurisdiction over civil causes of action between Indians or to which Indians are parties which arise [within any Indian country within the state] ... to the same extent that [California] . has jurisdiction over other civil causes of action, and those civil laws of such State or Territory that are of general application to private persons or private property shall have the same force and effect within such Indian country as they have elsewhere within the State or Territory: :(! ‡ !{« S}! * ifc “(b) Nothing in this section shall authorize the alienation, encumbrance, or taxation of any real or personal property, including water rights, belonging to any Indian or any Indian tribe, band, or community that is held in trust by the United States . ' . . ; or shall authorize regulation of the use of such property in a manner inconsistent with any Federal treaty, agreement, or statute or with any regulation made pursuant thereto; or shall confer jurisdiction upon the State to adjudicate, in probate proceedings or otherwise, the ownership or right to possession of such property or any interest therein. “(c) Any tribal ordinance or custom heretofore or hereafter adopted by an Indian tribe, band, or community in the exercise of any authority which it may possess shall, if not inconsistent with any applicable civil law of the State, be given full force and effect in the determinati”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“on the right of reservation Indians to make their own laws and be ruled by them.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he requirement of affirmative legislative action [was not] an idle choice of words; the legislative history of the 1953 statute shows that the requirement was intended to assure that state jurisdiction would not be extended until the jurisdictions to be responsible for the portion of Indian country concerned manifested by political action their willingness and ability to discharge their new responsibilities.”
5 later decisions 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.