Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 588 F.2d 697 - United States v. Ruby Co.

United States v. Ruby Co.’s Empirical Analysis

588 F.2d 697 · 1978

Citation profile

142
cited by 142 later decisions
2
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

57 federal appellate · 23 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 142 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably Watkins v. United States Army (1989), Portmann v. United States (1982)

57 federal appellate · 23 district · 3 state decisions

97019781980199020002010decided

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 Hill v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners, Local 25 · Utah Power Light Company v. United States No 202 United States · United States v. California · United States Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Hibi · Moser 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 142 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) The party to be estopped must know the facts; (2) He must intend that his conduct shall be acted on or must so act that the party asserting the estoppel has a right to believe it is so intended; (3) The latter must be ignorant of the true facts; and (4) He must rely on the former's conduct to his injury.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “An affirmative misrepresentation or affirmative concealment of a material fact”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The Secretary of the Interior may, as of March 3, 1909, in his discretion cause to be made, as he may deem wise under the rectangular system on that date provided by law, such resurveys or retracements of the surveys of public lands as, after full investigation, he may deem essential to properly mark the boundaries of the public lands remaining undisposed of ....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.