Cooper v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 55 state decisions

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

1. ““* * * In the case before us, the defendant, Edwards, did know of the relationship of the plaintiff’s authors in title, to the deceased Henry Cooper, and to Benjamin F. Cooper, when defendant bought the land from him. Defendant was remotely related to the heirs of Henry Cooper and was personally acquainted with them. Whether his knowledge in that ■ respect might affect the title he acquired from' Benjamin F. Cooper, if it were not protected by the prescription of three years,, is only an abstract question; because the title is protected by the prescription of three years. It is evidenced by a tax sale that has been duly recorded for a period exceeding three years, during which time the tax debtors, for whose taxes the property was sold, have not had possession of it. Under these conditions, according to the language of the Constitution, the tax sale was not subject to an action of annulment after three years, except for a dual assessment or for previous payment of the taxes-for which the property was sold. There-was no such ground of complaint in this-case. The only complaint is that the purchaser of the property at the tax sale was-already a part owner of it, and was therefore, like plaintiff’s authors in title, a delinquent debtor for the taxes for which the-property was sold. It was decided in each of the two cases last referred to, Harris v. Natalbany Lumber Co. ( 119 La. 978 , 44 So. 806 ) and Vestal v. Producers’ Oil Co. ( 135 La. 984 , 66 So. 334 ) that an action to an”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Keller v. Haas