Halbert v. Green’s Empirical Analysis
1956
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably Katz v. Rodriguez (1978), Centerpoint Energy Houston Electric, L.L.P. v. Old TJC Co. (2005)
28 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 Permian Oil Co. v. Smith · Richardson v. Hart · Permian Oil Co. v. Smith · Kirby Lumber Company v. Conn · Norris v. Colorado Turkey Honestone Co.
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"When respondents executed the quit-claim deed they may have had an equitable right to have the deed of October 29, 1952, reformed precisely as it was reformed by the February 27th deed, but that right did not pass under the quit-claim either. In Thompson on Real Property, Permanent Edition, Vol. 7, § 3748, p. 222, we find the pertinent rule stated in this language: `The grantee's cause of action to reform the deed is personal to him, and not a covenant running with the land, and will not therefore, without apt words of assignment, pass to a purchaser from the grantee under a deed which describes the same land described in the deed to his grantor.' The rule, as stated, is supported by Norris v. Colorado Turkey Honestone Co., 22 Colo. 162 , 43 P. 1024 ."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Glenney v. Crane““Petitioner’s general plea in trespass to try title and respondents’ plea of not guilty put in issue the title to the entire ⅛⅛ mineral interest, and the effect of the ‘take nothing’ judgment was, as between the parties, to divest all title to the entire interest out of petitioner, Halbert, and to vest the same in respondents Green. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Turner v. Land
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.