Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 42 OR 49 - McCall v. Porter

McCall v. Porter’s Empirical Analysis

1902

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
5
states following
June 1979
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 31 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently June 1979 · most notably Hough v. Porter (1909), In Re Water Rights of Deschutes River (1929)

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 31 state decisions

10019021910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Nevada Ditch Co. v. Bennett · Simmons v. Winters · Thomas v. Guiraud · Butte Canal & Ditch Co. v. Vaughn · Low v. Rizor

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

  1. ““The foundation of the doctrine of prior appropriation of water is, prior in time, prior in right, and therefore he whose appropriation is first in time acquires rights against subsequent appropriators, locators, or grantees, to the extent of his appropriation. The waters of a natural stream are subject to successive appropriations, and, so long as the subsequent appropriators do not injure or impair the rights of those prior to them, they may use as much water as they choose. There may thus be numerous and different appropriators of the waters of the same stream; the rights of each depending, as against the others, on the date or time of his appropriation.””
    1 later decision 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.