Smith v. Burrus’s Empirical Analysis
1912
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently October 1956
1 federal appellate · 13 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 Simmons Creek Coal Co. v. Doran · Thompson v. Etowah Iron Co. · Pavlovski v. Klassing
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A party in possession of land, who resorts to a court of equity to settle a question of title is not chargeable with laches, no matter how long his delay. Such a party is at liberty to wait until his title is attacked before he is obliged to act. The most frequent illustrations of this principle are found m suits by parties in possession to remove a cloud on title or to quiet title. Where, however, statutes permit such suits by parties out of possession, the doctrine of laches does apply, if the plaintiff is not in possession.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Woodall v. Clark
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.