Talk:Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

U.S. Supreme Court cases

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Consistency on "right of way" versus "right-of-way"

The pedants out there who read this ;-) will probably quickly notice that "right of way" is hyphenated and unhyphenated with reckless abandon. This could be made consistent, but unfortunately the underlying material is also inconsistent. The General Railroad Right-of-Way Act of 1875's title is hyphenated, but the Act's text uses the unhyphenated form. The land patent in the case uses the hyphenated form. The circuit opinion uniformly uses the hyphenated form (and not just when quoting the land patent). The Supreme Court's opinion uses the unhyphenated form, except when quoting the circuit opinion (itself quoting the land patent) and when referring to the 1875 Act by name. At some point you just have to throw your hands up and give up on consistency here, I think. :-) Waldo (talk) 01:50, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20140411063550/http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/article/20140313/WDH01/303120353/Impact-state-trails-uncertain-wake-Supreme-Court-easement-decision to http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/article/20140313/WDH01/303120353/Impact-state-trails-uncertain-wake-Supreme-Court-easement-decision

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:50, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]