Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 117 Conn. 176 - Bickell v. Moraio

Bickell v. Moraio’s Empirical Analysis

1933

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
9
states following
March 2006
most recently cited

2 district · 44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently March 2006 · most notably Moore v. Serafin (1972), Booker v. Old Dominion Land Co. (1948)

2 district · 44 state decisions

11019331940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Trustees of Columbia College v. . Thacher · Rombauer v. Compton Heights Christian Church · Jackson v. Stevenson · Bauby v. Krasow · Peck v. Conway

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

  1. “The creation, in a building development scheme, of an area restricted to residential purposes contemplates the continued existence of such an area from which business is excluded.... *Page 168 Purchasers of lots in such an area buy in reliance upon the fact that all other lots in the area are subject to the same restrictions as those contained in their own deeds, and that the entire development will retain its character as a purely residential district. So long as it remains possible to carry out the original purpose of the development each purchaser of a lot has a right to the protection of his easement in all the other lots in the restricted area, in the absence of conduct on his part constituting laches, waiver or abandonment. It is only when there has been a radical change in the conditions existing when the restrictive covenants were created which completely defeats the objects and purposes of the covenants so that they are no longer effective, and their enforcement would not afford the protection which was in the contemplation of the parties, that equity will hold the restrictions no longer enforceable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.