Beres v. States’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 16 U.S.C. § 1241 (Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail Act) · 16 U.S.C. § 1247 · 16 U.S.C. § 1248 · 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 43 U.S.C. § 912 · 43 U.S.C. § 934 · 43 U.S.C. § 937 · 49 U.S.C. § 10904
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Williams v. Taylor · United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc. · Duncan v. Walker
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The 1922 Act [ 43 U.S.C. § 912 ] was restating the obvious conclusion regarding the language of the 1875 Act and other right-of-way statutes that, in the absence of additional language, a right-of-way through public lands allowed for a limited use and did not reserve any fee type interests or reversionary rights as part of that right-of-way. It would appear that the language of the 1922 Act was intended to address, clarify, and resolve issues created by the imprecise language employed by the courts on this subject in the early part of the twentieth century.... In the alternative, it has been suggested that the 1922 Act applied only to pre-1871 grants to railroad companies because prior to that date railroad companies were issued outright land grants, as opposed to the right-of-way granted to railroad companies after that date.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.