18 Utah 2d 282 - Fuoco v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Grayson Roper Ltd. Partnership v. Finlinson (1989), Ault v. Holden (2002)
38 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 14 Utah 2d 135 - King v. Fronk · 15 Utah 2d 156 - Fuoco v. Williams · Brown v. Milliner · 2 Utah 2d 119 - Ringwood v. Bradford · Huddart v. McGirk
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A monument must be some tangible landmark to indicate a boundary. Objects to qualify as a monument must have' certain physical properties such as visibility, permanence, stability and a definite location . . . 3”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In order to establish a boundary by acquiescence ... recognition and acquiescence must be mutual, and both parties must have knowledge of the existence of [the] line as [the] boundary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“occupation up to a visible line marked by monuments, fences or buildings”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lee v. Konrad
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.