Loomis v. Cobb’s Empirical Analysis
1913
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably Sapp v. Warner (1932), Westland Oil Development Corp. v. Gulf Oil Corp. (1982)
5 federal appellate · 1 district · 26 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 Patty v. Middleton · Threadgill v. Bickerstaff · Daniel v. Mason · 8 Tex. Civ. App. 601 - New York and Texas Land Co. v. Hyland · Duren v. Houston & Texas Central Railway 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is a familiar and thoroughly well-settled principle of realty law that a purchaser has constructive notice of every matter connected with or affecting his estate which appears ~by recital, reference, or otherwise upon the face of any deed which forms an essential link in the chain of instruments through which he deraigns his title. The rationale of the rule is that any description, recital of fact, or reference to other documents puts the purchaser upon inquiry, and he is bound to follow up this inquiry, step by step, from one discovery to another and from one instrument to another, until the whole series of title deeds is exhausted and a complete knowledge of all the matters referred to and affecting the estate .is obtained. Being thus put upon inquiry, the purchaser is presumed to have prosecuted it until its final result and with ultimate success.” (Italics ours.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Being thus put upon inquiry, the purchaser is presumed to have prosecuted it until its final result and with ultimate success.... [I]f he shows by convincing evidence that he did make the inquiry, and did prosecute it with all care and diligence required of a reasonably prudent man, and that he failed to discover the existence of, or to obtain knowledge of, any conflicting claim ... then the presumption which has arisen against him will be completely overcome; ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bennerson v. Small
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.