Kale v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
489 F.2d 449 · 1973
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently July 2006 · most notably Montgomery v. Rumsfeld (1978), Lee v. United States (1987)
24 federal appellate · 6 district ·
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 25 U.S.C. § 334 · 25 U.S.C. § 345 · 28 U.S.C. § 1353 · 43 U.S.C. § 315F
Relies on Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. · United States & Interstate Commerce Commission v. Abilene & Southern Railway Co. · Hoofnagle v. Anderson · Duluth Co v. Roy · Hopkins v. United States
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a)pplication of the rule (requiring exhaustion) is not jurisdictional, but calls for the sound exercise of judicial discretion,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he protest was dismissed ... for the reason that settlement under Sec. 4 of the General Allotment Act was not available to an Indian until authorized by classification. The selection by an Indian carried no right to a particular tract of land.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a United States patent is protected from easy third-party attack. It is not sufficient for one challenging a patent to show that the patentee should not have received the patent; he must also show that he (the challenger) is entitled to it.”
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.