Pence v. Kleppe’s Empirical Analysis
529 F.2d 135 · 1976
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 24 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently August 2010 · most notably City of Santa Clara v. Andrus (1978), Elliott v. Weinberger (1977)
44 federal appellate · 24 district · 6 state decisions
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 Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Morrissey v. Brewer · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Goldberg v. Kelly · Goss v. Lopez
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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“authorized the Secretary “in his discretion and under such rules as he may prescribe” (§ 270-1) to allot up to 160 acres of vacant, unappropriated, and unreserved land in Alaska to any qualified Alaska Native. To qualify, the Native applicant must make “proof satisfactory to the Secretary ... of substantially continuous use and occupancy of the land for a period of five years.” (§ 270-3) The Secretary’s regulations construe the Act to allow for customary and seasonal patterns of use and oceupan cy, but require that there must be actual possession and use, potentially exclusive of others, and not merely intermittent use. 43 C.F.R. § 2561.0-5 (a). Thus, an applicant can meet the required qualifications by showing seasonal use of the claimed land, potentially exclusive of others, for five consecutive years for such customary purposes as hunting, fishing, or berry picking.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“written documents do not allow the trier of fact to assess the demeanor and attitude of the various witnesses and thereby test their credibility.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“applicants whose claims are to be rejected must be notified of the specific reasons for the proposed rejection.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Silas v. Babbitt · Pence v. Andrus
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.