Nebraska v. Wyoming’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 70 district · 19 state decisions

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

1. “make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to [their] case.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Tmi, Dorothy L. Aldrich Faith Alleman Philip Angeli Michael J. Anoka Ruth v. Anoka Catherine J. Balinosky Regis E. Beasley Louis Borda Betty Marie Boylestein George L. Boylestein Shirlean Burhanan Ruth E. Butler Frank J. Caka Susan H. Chynoweth Daniel M. Chynoweth Catherine Costello John T. Costello Martha A. Costik Richard N. Costik Mary Margaret Earhart Edward Ferguson Marco G. Glad, Jr. Linda I. Glad Barbara Grandon Helen M. Hank Edward John Hertzog Marie H. Hertzog Dianne Hindermyer George Vance Hitz Marjorie B. Hitz Carol C. Hoch Louis A. Hoch Estate of Robert P. Holmes Thelma M. Nagy Barry Obercash Georgeann Pristello James J. Pristello Jamie Lynn Pristello Kenneth R. Snyder Patricia Southard Joseph Stewart Charlotte Evelyn Stewart · Frobose v. American Savings & Loan Ass'n

2. “issue of material fact. Accordingly, I find as a fact on this record that the debtors' student loans were consolidated on November 10, 1996, and that there were no previous consolidations of the loans. DISCUSSION Both parties seek the entry of summary judgment on the papers. Summary judgment is appropriate where the moving party is entitled to judgment, as a matter of law, and where there exists no genuine dispute as to any material fact. Bankruptcy Rule 7056 makes Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 applicable to adversary proceedings. Rule 56(c) provides, in pertinent part that the”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 188 F. Supp. 2d 461 - McCoy v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF LABORERS'INTERN. · In Re Harrison

3. “The decree did not explicitly establish the Inland Lakes’ priority. But it is undisputed that the Court recognized a right to store 46,000 acre-feet of water in the Inland Lakes and, at Wyoming’s suggestion, counted that amount to reduce Nebraska’s requirement of natural flows in the pivotal reach. The Master therefore concluded that the Inland Lakes’ priority was a necessary predicate of the apportionment and should not be disturbed. He also suggested that Wyoming’s postdecree acquiescence in the Bureau’s administration of the Inland Lakes should prevent Wyoming from challenging the 1904 priority date now. We think the evidence from the prior litigation supports the conclusion that the Inland Lakes’ priority was settled there. And even if the issue was not previously determined, we would agree with the Special Master that Wyoming’s arguments are foreclosed by its postdeeree acquiescence. Accordingly, we clarify today that the Inland Lakes share a December 6, 1904, priority date with other original components of the North Platte Project. Pursuant to that priority, the Bureau has a right to divert 46,000 acre-feet of water during the nonirrigation season months of October, November, and April for storage in the Inland Lakes.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. A & B Irrigation District v. Idaho Department of Water Resources