Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 127 Conn. 455 - Andrews v. Cox

Andrews v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

125
cited by 125 later decisions
8
states following
October 2005
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 120 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 125 later decisions — most recently October 2005 · most notably Budney v. Ives (1968), Town of Winchester v. Cox (1942)

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 120 state decisions

2801941195019601970198019902000decided

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 Olson v. United States · Boom Company v. Patterson · Town of Stamford v. Vuono · Appeal of Cohen From Board of Street Commissioners · Sargent v. Inhabitants of Merrimac

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

  1. “the difference between the market value of the whole tract as it lay before the taking, and the market value of what remained of it thereafter and after completion of the public improvement.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. Commissioner of Transportation v. Key, No. Cv99 0172903 S (Apr. 17, 2002) · 45 Conn. Super. Ct. 605 - Bristol v. Milano
  2. “In determining the market value of a remainder after a partial taking, it is proper for the trier to consider all elements which are a natural and proximate result of the taking and which could legitimately affect the price a prospective purchaser would pay for the land. Any expenses which are reasonably necessary to adapt the remaining land to use in view of changes to be made in the land taken may properly enter into the damages to be awarded.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. Commissioner of Transportation v. Key, No. Cv99 0172903 S (Apr. 17, 2002) · 47 Conn. Super. Ct. 418 - Commissioner of Trans. v. Shea
  3. “When a portion of a tract of land is taken the rule for estimating the damages to which the owner is entitled, in the absence of unusual circumstances, is thoroughly settled; it is the difference between the market value of the whole tract as it lay before the taking, and the market value of what remains of it thereafter and after the completion of the public improvement.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. Commissioner of Transportation v. Key, No. Cv99 0172903 S (Apr. 17, 2002) · 2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 17392 - Commissioner of Transportation v. Tai, No. Cv99 0170520 S (Dec. 31, 2001)

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.