State v. Brewer’s Empirical Analysis
1943
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably Brazos River Authority v. City of Graham (1961), Cook Consultants, Inc. v. Larson (1985)
3 federal appellate · 40 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 Roushlange v. Chicago & Atlantic Railway Co. · Mexican National Construction Co. v. Meddlegge · 36 Tex. Civ. App. 498 - City of Houston v. Bartels · 32 Tex. Civ. App. 389 - Bartels v. City of Houston · Davis v. Clark
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The conveyance of land for a public purpose will ordinarily vest in the grantee the same rights as though the land had been acquired by condemnation proceedings. * * * Grantors cannot recover for any damages to the remainder of the land, the land not conveyed, which result from a proper construction, use, and operation of the highway on such property ⅜ ⅝ ⅝ » “ * * * he did not testify that the engineer, or anyone else représent-ing the State, agreed as a part of the consideration'that the cut would not be deeper than three to four feet, or that he would be paid any additional compensation in case it should be. * * *» “We are unable to see how these improvements, made in conformity with reasonable regulations for the public safety, could create any liability against the State for additional compensation. The conveyance by the Brewers to the State gave the State the right to make all necessary improvements on the land conveyed therein. There was no promise, express or implied, that the State would pay any further compensation than' that paid the Brewers at the time the deed was executed. This conveyance was absolute and unconditional, and unless it is shown that the State violated some legal right it owed the Brewers in constructing the highway, then no cause of action arose against the State.’'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"* * * `To give a right of redress there must not only be an injury or loss but it must have been occasioned by the commission of a legal wrong, that is, violation of legal right and a breach of legal duty."”
1 later decision 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.