Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 142 Tex. 274 - Richey v. Miller

Richey v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

1944

Citation profile

68
cited by 68 later decisions
4
states following
June 1997
most recently cited

65 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently June 1997 · most notably Rourke v. Garza (1975), Hejl v. Wirth (1961)

65 state decisions

170194419501960197019801990decided

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 Mhoon v. Cain · De Las Fuentes v. McDonald · Proprietors of the Kennebeck Purchase v. Springer · Moore v. Carey Bros. Oil Co. · Ramapo Manufacturing Co. v. Mapes

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

  1. ““It has been held that the use of land for grazing purposes only is not sufficient compliance with the statute. West Production Co. v. Kahanek, 132 Tex. 153 , 121 S.W.2d 328 ; Fuentes v. McDonald, 85 Tex. 132 , 20 S.W. 43 ; Mhoon v. Cain, 77 Tex. 316 , 14 S.W. 24 . “■In the case of Fuentes v. McDonald, supra ( 85 Tex. 132 , 20 S.W. 44 ), Judge Gaines, in rendering the opinion of this court said: ‘There have been several cases decided in this court in which the effort has been made to. show an adverse possession of land by merely grazing cattle and horses upon it, but it has uniformly been held that the possession was not sufficient to meet the requirements of the statute. Mason v. Stapper, Tex.Sup., 8 S.W. 598 ; Sellman v. Hardin, 58 Tex. 86 ; Andrews v. Marshall, 26 Tex. 212 ; Murphy v. Welder, 58 Tex. (235), 241. * * * >»”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““A tract of land owned by one person, entirely surrounded by a tract or tracts owned, claimed or fenced by another, shall not be considered inclosed by a fence inclosing the circumscribing tract or tracts, or any part thereof; nor shall the possession by the owner or claimant of such circumscribing land of such interior tract be the peaceable and adverse possession contemplated by Article 5510 unless the same be segregated and separated from the circumscribing land by a fence, or unless at least one-tenth thereof be cultivated and used for agricultural purposes, or used for manufacturing purposes.””
    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.