Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 133 Cal. 78 - Andrus v. Smith

Andrus v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1901

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
June 1961
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently June 1961

12 state decisions

401901191019201930194019501960decided

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 Unger v. Mooney · Webber v. Clarke · Halleck v. Mixer · Sheldon v. Mull · McCreery v. Everding

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

  1. ““It has been held that where the property is in some way subjected to the will and control of the claimant, that an inclosure is not always necessary.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““And where a party enters, under color of title, and has actual possession of a part of the whole tract, he has constructive possession of the whole.””
    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.