Hogue v. Bourgois’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Gajewski v. Bratcher (1974), 29 Cal. 3d 210 - State of California v. Superior Court (Lyon) (1981)
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 18 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
Relies on Jefferis v. East Omaha Land Co. · Nebraska v. Iowa · State of Nebraska v. State of Lowa · Cooley v. Golden · Fowler v. Wood
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"47-06-05. Riparian accretions. Where from natural causes land forms by imperceptible degrees upon the bank of a river or stream, navigable or not navigable, either by accumulation of material or by the recession of the stream, such land belongs to the owner of the bank, subject to any existing right of way over the bank."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he law governing riparian rights has no regard for artificial boundary lines.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Where an island arises in a navigable river apart from riparian owners’ land, as in the case at bar, such owners cannot claim title thereto by reason of their riparian rights, though the island is afterwards joined to their land, since it did not become part thereof by gradual accretion to or reliction from the shore. Holman v. Hodges, * * * [ 112 Iowa 714 , 84 N.W. 950 , 58 L.R.A. 673 , 84 Am.St.Rep. 367 ]; Hahn v. Dawson, 134 Mo. 581 , 36 S.W. 233 ; Crandall v. Smith, 134 Mo. 633 , 36 S.W. 612 ; Buse v. Russell, 86 Mo. 209, 214 . It is upon this principle that many of the cases cited by counsel for defendants do not sustain their position in the case at bar. Typical of these cases are Allard v. Curran, 41 S.D. 73 , 168 N.W. 761 ; Yearsley v. Gipple, 104 Neb. 88 , 175 N.W. 641 , 8 A.L.R. 636 ; Dailey v. Ryan, 71 S.D. 58 , 21 N.W.2d 61 . See also 8 A.L.R. 640 , 41 A.L.R. 395 . These are cases where the Missouri River washed away all of a tract that was riparian to the river and for some distance into a more remote tract and thereafter the river receded and by gradual accretion to or reliction from the mainland restored all of both tracts. This situation must be distinguished from the case at bar where the accretions and relictions claimed by the plaintiffs accrued to the island and not to the mainland.” Hogue v. Bourgois, N.D., 71 N.W.2d 47, at 54 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Perry v. Erling
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.