Rodgers v. Watt’s Empirical Analysis
726 F.2d 1376 · 1984
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently May 2017
3 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 30 U.S.C. § 22 · 30 U.S.C. § 611
Relies on Federal Communications Commission v. Home Box Office, Inc. · United States v. Coleman · Andrus v. Charlestone Stone Products Co. · Barrows v. Hickel · United States v. An Article of Drug
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“test that asks whether a person of ordinary prudence would be justified in the further expenditure of labor and means, with a reasonable prospect of success, in developing a valuable mine. Id. at 602. 7 Here, the government properly relied on expert testimony to establish that the stone on the Melluzzos' claims was of”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Melluzzo v. Lujan“[i]f a claimant submits evidence that supports the government's claim of invalidity, that evidence can be used to establish the government's prima facie case”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Melluzzo v. Lujan
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.