Sayers v. Pyland’s Empirical Analysis
1942
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 78 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 98 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably INWOOD NORTH HOMEOWNERS'ASS'N v. Harris (1987), Mapco, Inc. v. Carter (1991)
7 federal appellate · 78 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 Hanrick v. Gurley · American Fire Insurance v. Brooks · Kalteyer v. Wipff · Massillon Engine & Thresher Co. v. Barrow · Reed v. Howard
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 98 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is true that in this instance Pyland’s homestead right had attached to the property prior to the time Williams became a joint owner therein; but the record discloses that after they had acquired their homestead right therein, Pyland and wife, in the matter provided by law for the sale of a homestead, conveyed to Williams an undivided one-half interest in the property, and thereby voluntarily subordinated their homestead right to all the rights and obligations appertaining to the relation of tenants in common. Consequently they thereafter stood in the same position as if their homestead right in the property had been acquired after the parties had become tenants in common in the property.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cline v. Henry · Wisner v. Pavlin““It is also well recognized that in partition proceedings, the court may, if necessary, divide the property into shares of unequal value and adjust the difference by owelty. Sayers v. Pyland, 139 Tex. 57 , 161 S.W.2d 769 , 140 A.L.R. 1164 .””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]t is ... a well-recognized principle of law that one's homestead right in property can never rise any higher than the right, title, or interest that he owns in the property attempted to be impressed with a homestead right.”
2 later decisions 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.