Harris v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis
1942
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently January 2015
9 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 Westfall v. Cottrills · Whealton & Wisherd v. Doughty · Lumbard v. Aldrich · Gordon Metal Co. v. Kingan & Co. · Dickens v. . Barnes
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Generally, if the description of the land intended to be embraced and the title thereto conveyed by the deed is so indefinite or uncertain that it fails to designate or identify the land meant, the deed is inoperative; for a deed to be valid on its face requires not only a grantor and a grantee, but also a thing granted, and if the description is too indefinite to convey anything, then the paper on its face lacks one of the essential elements of a conveyance, for it is essential to the validity of a grant that the thing granted should be so described as to be capable of being distinguished from other things of the same kind. Hence, a deed which conveys no particular spot of ground can transfer no title. So, where a line only is given, no land being included, the deed is a nullity, inasmuch as nothing is granted, or where two lines are given, with nothing to show what is embraced; and a grant cannot be located when described as beginning at a stake with nothing further to locate the stake, and the other comers are described as points at the end of course and distance, the same rule applying where no ending or starting point is named.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Doyle v. Wiendieck““ Where the claimant of title relies upon a deed of conveyance, it is well settled, both by reason and authority, that, in order to be effective as evidence of title, it must either in terms or by reference to other designation give such description of the subject-matter intended to be conveyed as will be sufficient to identify the same with reasonable certainty.’ Warville on Ejectment Section 295.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bryan v. Bryan
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.