Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 Tex. 576 - Stevens v. Pedregon

Stevens v. Pedregon’s Empirical Analysis

1915

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
May 2008
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently May 2008

4 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

1801915192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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.

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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““In the first place, he made no claim of right to the land. The statute specifically required that he should enter under a claim of right, hut he entered with the avowed purpose of acquiring title by possession, and not for the purpose of enjoying the property which he claimed to belong to him.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““At no time from the first entry upon the land to the institution of this suit does defendant in error claim to have actually resided upon the land, nor to have had the land or any part of it inclosed; nor does he claim that at any time he had a tenant upon it for a length of time sufficient to constitute limitation under any provision of the law or any decision of this court. Such possession as he claims to have had consisted of cultivating a small portion of the land, one year at one place and the next year at another. Some years there was no cultivation of any part of the land for the want of water. There was nothing in his acts that would indicate a claim of ownership of the land. All that defendant in error did in the use of the land might well have been regarded as harmless trespass. Schleicher et al. v. Gatlin, 85 Tex. 270 , 20 S. W. 120 .””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Adverse possession is an actual and visible appropriation of the land, commenced and continued under a claim of right inconsistent with and hostile to the claim of another.””
    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.