Anderson v. Smith-Powers Logging Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1914
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 3 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently September 1972
6 federal appellate · 3 district · 10 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 Healy Lumber Co. v. Morris · Minnesota Canal & Power Co. v. Koochiching Co. · Fanning v. Gilliland · Sholl v. German Coal Co. · Apex Transportation Co. v. Garbade
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We hold that so much of said Section 6307, L. O. L., as.relates to the establishment of a county road from the timber land or timber of a person owning the same to some public road, steamboat landing, or railway station is unconstitutional because it, in effect, attempts to authorize the taking of private property for a private use.” Anderson v. Smith-Powers Logging Co., supra.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.