Burkhardt v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
1 district · 39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently September 2019 · most notably Roche v. Town of Fairfield (1982), Anderson v. Cold Spring Tungsten, Inc. (1969)
1 district · 39 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 Illinois Steel Co. v. Bilot · Schiro v. Oriental Realty Co. · Meyer v. Hope · Ladd v. Hildebrant · Ovig v. Morrison
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Actual occupancy means the ordinary use to which the land is capable and such as an owner would make of it. Any actual visible means, which gives notice of exclusion from the property to the true owner or to the public and of the defendant’s dominion over it, is sufficient.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“does not mean a deliberate, willful, unfriendly animus. If the elements of open, notorious, continuous and exclusive possession are satisfied, the law presumes the element of hostile intent.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“would indicate to any stranger that . . . [the lot] was usually being used as an owner would use such land in that lake resort area and thus proclaimed he asserted exclusive ownership.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.