Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 Kan. 593 - Tucker v. Hankey

Tucker v. Hankey’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
2
states following
April 2012
most recently cited

44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently April 2012 · most notably Manville v. Gronniger (1958), Smith v. Harris (1957)

44 state decisions

3001952196019701980199020002010decided

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 Bruington v. Wagoner · Holton v. Holton · Jones v. Jones · In Re Estate of Johannes · Robinson v. Davis

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

  1. ““It may be stated that the question of adverse possession is one of intention. The intent with which the occupant has held possession is to be determined from all of the surrounding circumstances and especially from the acts of the possessor. His intention need not have been manifested by word of mouth . . . tire acts done must be such as to give unequivocal notice of the claim to the land adverse to the claims of all others and must be of such a character and so openly done that the real owner will be presumed to know that a possession adverse to his title has been taken. . . .” (p. 400.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““To constitute adverse possession of land, it is not absolutely necessary that there should be [e]nclosures, buildings, or cultivation, but the acts done must be such as to give unequivocal notice of the claim to the land, adverse to the claims of all others, and must be of such a character and so openly done that the real owner will be presumed to know that a possession adverse to his title has been taken.” Tucker v. Hankey, 173 Kan. 593 , Syl. ¶ 3, 250 P.2d 784 (1952).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““All trial errors and irregularities must be shown by the record to have been presented to the trial court on a motion for new trial before they can be considered by this court on appeal.” (Syl. f 2.)”
    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.