Boylan v. Lillard’s Empirical Analysis
174 F.2d 572 · 1949
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 2011
1 federal appellate · 2 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 Marland v. Gillespie · Higgins v. Oklahoma City · 40 Cal. App. 508 - MacFarland v. Walker · Bodwell Granite Co. v. Lane
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But a declaration of the purpose for which the conveyance is made or for which the granted land is to be used, without more, does not limit the estate granted. “It is true that under the Oklahoma decisions, in arriving at the intent of the parties, the whole instrument will be considered, but the quitclaim deed must be construed with due consideration given to § 29, supra (16 Okl.St.Ann. § 29). Here, there was no express limitation of the granting clause or of the haben-dum clause. The recital relied upon was merely of the purpose for which the quitclaim deed was given. It does not purport expressly or impliedly to limit either the granting clause or the habendum clause which were unqualified.””
1 later decision 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.