John Doe v. William Wilson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions

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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““By the treaty of October 27, 1832, made by the United States; through commissioners, with the Pottawatomie Tribe of Indians and the state of Indiana and Michigan Territory, said nation ceded to the United States their title and interest in and to their lands in the state of Indiana and Illinois, and the Michigan Territory south of Grand river. Many reservations were made in favor of Indian villagers, jointly and to individual Pottawato-mies. The reservations are by sections, amounting probably to 100, lying in various parts of the ceded country. As to these, the Indian title remained as it stood before the treaty was made; and •to complete the title as to the reserved lands the United States agreed that they would issue patents to the respective owners. One of these reservees was the chief Pet-chi-co, to whom was ■ reserved two sections. The treaty also provides That the foregoing reservations shall be selected under the direction of the President of the United States, after the land shall have been surveyed, and the boundaries shall correspond with the public surveys.5 In February, 1833, by a deed in fee simple, Pet-chi-co conveyed to Alexis Coquillard and David PI. Colerick, of the state of Indiana, ‘all those sections of land lying in the state aforesaid, in the region of country or territory ceded by the treaty of 27th October, 1832.5 The grantor covenants lawful authority to sell and convey the same and he furthermore warrants the title against himself and his heirs. Un”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Godfrey v. Iowa Land & Trust Co.

2. “the description of the land in the deeds from Pet-ehi-eo to Coquillard and Colerick, from Colerick to Coquillard, and from Coquillard to Wilson, are sufficient to identify the land thereby intended to be conveyed, as the same two ■ sections of land which are in controversy in this suit, and which are described in the patents which have been read in evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Prentice v. Stearns

3. ““The foregoing reservations shall he selected under the direction of the President of 1he United States, after the land shall have been surveyed, and the boundaries shall correspond with the public surveys.” 7 Stat. 401 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Conway v. United States