Beauchamp v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis
1908
Citation profile
2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently May 1974
2 district · 7 state decisions
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 McFern v. Gardner · Cox v. Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad · Webb v. Carter · Applegate v. Franklin · Edwards v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Defendants demurred to tbe evidence, and here insist that their demurrer should have been given. Their contention is that plaintiff purchased the land with knowledge that defendants had constructed and were maintaining the levee, and therefore purchased it burdened with the levee. If the levee was not a lawful structure —that is, if it obstructed the flow of water in a natural channel— it was a nuisance, and, while plaintiff cannot sue and recover for the erection of the nuisance, he is clearly entitled to recover any damage he may have sustained by reason of Us maintenance.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Nelson v. Casey
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.