James v. Watt’s Empirical Analysis
716 F.2d 71 · 1983
Citation profile
39 federal appellate · 11 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2017 · most notably Mack v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. (1989), Correa-Martinez v. Arrillaga-Belendez (1990)
39 federal appellate · 11 district · 6 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 25 U.S.C. § 177
Relies on Hines v. Davidowitz · Gibbons v. Ogden · Oneida Indian Nation of New York State v. County of Oneida New York · McClanahan v. State Tax Commission of Arizona · White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker
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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“pursue a case to judgment and then, if they lose, to reopen the case by amending their complaint to take account of the court's decision”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“American courts recognize two distinct levels of ownership in Indian lands: fee title and Indian title. The common-law fee title passed to the European sovereign at discovery, and it could be transferred by him to his grantees. The fee title in lands that the British king retained passed to the individual states at the time of the revolution. These states, in turn, ceded to the central government their claims to the western territories beyond their present boundaries. Title to Indian lands within their borders, however, was retained by the thirteen original states. . . . Indian title, which gave Indians a 'right of occupancy,' coexisted with the fee title.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“This court has held that the INA [Indian Nonintercourse Act] was designed to protect the land rights only of tribes; that the INA therefore granted a cause of action to tribes; and that individual Indians could not assert INA rights on their own behalf.”
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.