United States v. Lazy FC Ranch’s Empirical Analysis
481 F.2d 985 · 1973
Citation profile
73 federal appellate · 15 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 177 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2016 · most notably Schweiker v. Hansen (1981), Watkins v. United States Army (1989)
73 federal appellate · 15 district · 22 state decisions — followed in 12 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 28 U.S.C. § 1345 · 7 U.S.C. § 1801
Relies on Federal Crop Ins Corporation v. Merrill · Utah Power Light Company v. United States No 202 United States · Moser v. United States · United States v. Georgia-Pacific Co. · Schuster v. Commissioner
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 177 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the government's wrongful conduct . . . to work a serious injustice . . . .”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“' "where justice and fair play require it,”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Moser-Brandt-Schuster line of cases establish the proposition that es-toppel is available as a defense against the government if the government’s wrongful conduct threatens to work a serious injustice and if the public's interest would not be unduly damaged by the imposition of estoppel. This proposition is true even if the government is acting in a capacity that has traditionally been described as sovereign . . . although we may be more reluctant to estop the government when it is acting in this capacity.”
2 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.