County of St. Clair v. Lovingston’s Empirical Analysis
90 U.S. 46 · 1874
Citation profile
47 federal appellate · 16 district · 120 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 254 later decisions (31 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2023 · most notably Shively v. Bowlby (1894), Philadelphia Co. v. Stimson (1912)
47 federal appellate · 16 district · 120 state decisions — followed in 35 states
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 Lessee of McCullock v. Aten
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 254 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In the light of the authorities, ‘alluvion’ may be defined as an addition to riparian land gradually and imperceptibly made by the water to which the land is contiguous.””
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““By the American Revolution the people of each State, in their sovereign character, acquired the absolute right to all their navigable waters and the soil under them. Martin v. Waddell, 16 Pet. 367 ; Russell v. Jersey Co., 15 How. 426 . The shores of navigable waters and the soil under them were not granted by the Constitution to the United States, but were reserved to the States respectively. And new States have the same rights of sovereignty and jurisdiction over this subject as the original ones.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘The question is well settled at common law that the person whose land is bounded by a stream of water which changes its course gradually by alluvial formations, shall still hold the same boundary, including the accumulated soil. No other rule can be applied on just principles. Every proprietor whose land is thus bounded is subject to loss by the same means which may add to his territory; and as he is without remedy for his loss in this way he cannot be held accountable for his gain.’ ””
3 later decisions 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.