McKeever v. Carter’s Empirical Analysis
1916
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently December 1969 · most notably Tidal Oil Company v. Flanagan (1922), Chupco v. Chapman (1917)
1 federal appellate · 36 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 Anderson v. Carkins · Scott v. Brakel · Hartman v. Butterfield Lumber Co. · Maharry v. Eatman · Stevens v. Elliott
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The only restriction upon alienation of the allotted land of the plaintiff herein, imposed or continued in force by the act of May 27, 1908, was that which rendered her personally powerless to contract with relation thereto while a minor as defined by that act. After she became 18 years of age, as shown by the enrollment records of the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, that restriction was, ipso facto, removed, and that act having spent its force, so far as her allotment and its future disposition were concerned, became inoperative. The deed of Jiwe 2, 1910, is apparently a separate and independent conveyance, voluntarily made by the plaintiff, the execution of which was perhaps prompted by a sense of her moral obligation to defendant. The land was then hers, free from all restraint upon alienation, and she could part with it to whomsoever she chose, upon any lawful consideration she saw fit to accept, or without consideration. When she thus conveyed it by proper deed for the recited consideration of ‘$1 and oth'er valuable considerations.’ such conveyance was binding upon her.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Armstrong v. Goble
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.