Madera Irrigation District v. Hancock’s Empirical Analysis
985 F.2d 1397 · 1993
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2010 · most notably Jack Metcalf v. William Daley US James Baker (2000), Sierra Club v. Babbitt (1995)
19 federal appellate · 1 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
Relies on Crowell v. Benson · Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co. · Lynch v. United States · Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe · National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[C]ontractual arrangements, including those to which a sovereign itself is party, 'remain subject to subsequent legislation' by the sovereign.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Whenever the United States shall be prepared to furnish service for irrigation or other purposes from Friant reservoir ..., the United States shall notify the District in writing relative to the availability and character of such service, and shall- define the classes and quantities of service then and thereafter to be made available and the respective prices and methods of payment therefor. The District shall have six (6) months from the date of receipt of said notice within which to contract for the purchase of water on the basis of the classes and quantities of service so offered to the District; provided, that, having due regard for the District’s procedure required or expedient in negotiating for and securing approval of such contract, the Secretary may grant such extensions of time as he deems desirable. It is mutually understood between the parties hereto that it is not possible at this time to fix a price to be paid by the District for said water, but the United States agrees that the cost of said water to the District shall not exceed charges made to others than the District for the same class of water and service from the said Friant Dam and Reservoir.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Whether the environmental terms added into the renewal threaten the proprietary rights preserved in Madera’s contract, a permanent right to a certain amount of water at rates no higher than those charged to other purchasers of the same class of water and service from Friant Dam and Reservoir, depends on how the environmental provisions are implemented. The government has not “ ‘surrendered in unmistakable terms’ ” its power to impose any environmental laws on the contractual relationship, so the required clause is not necessarily violative of Madera’s contractual rights. Bowen v. Public Agencies Opposed to Social Security Entrapment, 477 U.S. 41, 52 , 106 S.Ct. 2390 , 91 L.Ed.2d 35 (1986) (quoting Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe, 455 U.S. 130, 148 , 102 S.Ct. 894 , 71 L.Ed.2d 21 (1982)).”
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.