Glade v. Dietert’s Empirical Analysis
1956
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 70 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably Gregg v. Delhi-Taylor Oil Corp. (1961), White v. Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America (1969)
6 federal appellate · 70 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 Yearsley v. W. A. Ross Construction Co. · Brazos River Conservation & Reclamation District v. Costello · Wood v. Foster & Creighton Co. · Schooler v. State · Nunnelly v. Southern Iron 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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he measure of damages is the same whether the issue is tried by special commissioners, in the county court on appeal or in the district court on cross-action or by intervention. While technically it may be said that the entry by the contractor as the agent of the City constituted a separate cause of action against the City, yet, under the circumstances in such a case as this, to require the trial of two separate causes of action with double consumption of time and expense, when all of the damage actually was occasioned on account of the public improvement project and in pursuance thereto, would be a hardship on all parties, as well as useless and unnecessary.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * [T]he law should not be so strictly construed as to preclude respondents [Dieterts] from recovery in the county court, in the case now pending on appeal from the award of the commissioners [the condemnation case], of all damages to which they may be entitled, including the diminishment of the land value caused by removal of the trees.” 295 S.W.2d 646 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the law should not ... preclude [landowners] from recovery ... of all damages to which they may be entitled....”
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.