Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 119 TENN 47 - State v. Muncie Pulp Co.

State v. Muncie Pulp Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1907

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
8
states following
June 1982
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1982

13 state decisions

70190719101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Hardin v. Jordan · Cessill v. State

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

  1. “‘ ' The channels of the rivers and other streams and bodies of water may and do become changed and their physical location altered by the forces of nature operating upon their shores or banks. When the change is made insensibly, by gradual and imperceptible washing away of one shore and the formation in like manner upon the other shore, it is said to be 'by erosion and accretion.’ When it is made suddenly and violently, and is visible and the effect certain, it is called ‘avulsion’ ”.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The doctrine of accretions has no application to the filling up of the old channel, abandoned by the river for a new one, as the result of an avulsion. The rights of the parties, in every respect, remain as they existed prior to the change.””
    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.