Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 175 CALAPP2D 869 - Jones v. Harmon

Jones v. Harmon’s Empirical Analysis

1959

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
5
states following
November 2005
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently November 2005

23 state decisions

80195919601970198019902000decided

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 Nichols v. Mitchell · O'BANION v. Borba · City of Los Angeles v. City of Glendale · 70 Cal. App. 283 - Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Crockett Land & Cattle Co. · Pollard v. Rebman

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

  1. “Where pipes or other conduits as to which easements are claimed are buried underground and their presence is not physically apparent throughout the prescriptive period, the courts generally conclude that there is insufficient notoriety of the user to permit prescription to run against the servient estate. This result is often reached where there is an absence of substantial evidence that the servient owner had any notice or information of the existence of the facility and its user. However, circumstances sometimes arise such as to give even buried conduits notoriety adequate to base a prescriptive easement. This usually occurs where, even though the pipes themselves are not apparent, there are accessory installations on the surface which are plainly apparent. [Footnotes omitted.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Every person who has actual notice of circumstances sufficient to put a prudent man upon inquiry as to a particular fact, has constructive notice of the fact itself in all cases in which, by prosecuting such inquiry, he might have learned such fact.” (Civ. Code, § 19.)”
    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.