Winkler v. Andrus’s Empirical Analysis
614 F.2d 707 · 1980
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently January 2018
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1964 · 30 U.S.C. § 184 · 30 U.S.C. § 187A · 30 U.S.C. § 226 · 30 U.S.C. § 226 · 5 U.S.C. § 704 · 5 U.S.C. § 705
Relies on Cardillo v. United States · Boesche v. Udall · Calmar Steamship Corp. v. United States · Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. CHICAGO & ILLINOIS MIDLAND RAILWAY CO. · Denver Joint Stock Land Bank of Denver v. Dixon
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Pursuant to an Order of the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming, we are holding that the original lease, W 52387 was improperly issued to A. Lansdale and improperly assigned to Davis Oil Company, and the operating rights in leases W 65847 and W 65848 were improperly assigned to Marvin Davis. 8”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We have considered whether the presence of administrative proceedings is notice that a lawsuit is pending, and the majority rule is that a lawsuit is determined pending throughout the time in which appellate review of the original judgment may be taken.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Winkler v. Andrus“there was nothing in the official BLM file to indicate that A. Lansdale was not entitled to hold the lease, or that her offer was defective in any manner.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Winkler 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.