Orff v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
55 federal appellate · 30 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 188 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably M. Maropakis Carpentry, Inc. v. United States (2010), San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority v. Jewell (2014)
55 federal appellate · 30 district · 8 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedOrff v. United States (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1491
Relies on Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. Patterson · Lane v. Pena Secretary of Transportation · Department of the Army v. Blue Fox, Inc. · California v. United States · United States v. Gerlach Live Stock Co.
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 188 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Section 390uu grants consent “to join the United States as a necessary party defendant in any suit to adjudicate” certain rights under a federal reclamation contract. (Emphasis added.) This language is best interpreted to grant consent to join the United States in an action between other parties — for example, two water districts, or a water district and its members — when the action. requires construction of a reclamation contract and joinder of the United States is necessary. It does not permit a plaintiff to sue the United States alone.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“may be brought in any United States district court in the State in which the land involved is situated”). However, after this case was filed in federal district court, the Supreme Court in Orff held that Section 390uu is limited to cases where the United States is joined as a party defendant in an action between third parties and that Section 390uu does not waive the government’s sovereign”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“join the United States as a necessary party defendant in any suit to adjudicate, confirm, validate, or decree the contractual rights of a contracting entity and the United States regarding any contract executed pursuant to Federal reclamation law.”
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.