United States v. 10.69 Acres of Land, More or Less’s Empirical Analysis
425 F.2d 317 · 1970
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Fourco Glass Company v. Transmirra Products Corporation · Clifford Macevoy Co v. United States · Minnesota v. United States · Choate v. Trapp · Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian Nation
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The reason [for the map requirement of § 317] seems plain. When property sought for highway purposes is owned by third persons, no conflicting governmental use is likely to be involved. When the property is already owned by the United States, however, the possibility of a potentially conflicting governmental use is substantial. For this reason sections 107 (d) and 317 require the Secretary of Transportation to give notice of the proposed appropriation for highway purposes to the Secretary of the Department having control of the land, and provide a means by which the latter may protect any governmental interest in use of the property for purposes other than highway construction.”
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.