182 Ind. App. 511 - Cunningham v. Hiles’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently August 2013
3 federal appellate · 15 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 Rombauer v. Compton Heights Christian Church · 101 Ind. App. 306 - Bachman v. Colpaert Realty Corp. · 158 Ind. App. 43 - Bob Layne Contractor, Inc. v. Buennagel · Hecht v. Stephens · 32 Ill. App. 3d 722 - Exchange National Rank v. City of Des Plaines
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[Wle conclude that changes in an area surrounding an area protected by a restrictive covenant should be considered in the determination of the covenant's enforceability when these changes have significantly affected the residential character of the subdivision. At the same time, we conclude that the weight attributed to these changes should not be as great as that accorded changes which have occurred within the restricted area. [Thus,] [wlhile the increase of traffic on U.S. 30 has unfortunately diminished the residential value of some adjacent subdivision tracts, there is no evidence to indicate that the increased traffic load has affected the residential nature of life within Lincoln Knolls Estates Consequently, the evidence presented does not reveal that the changes which have occurred within and around the subdivision are so radical in nature that the purpose of the restrictive covenant has been defeated."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Burnett v. Heckelman“"The party against whom enforcement of the covenant is sought bears the burden of showing that enforcement of the covenant would violate public policy (citation omitted). This burden is not satisfied merely by proving that particular changes have occurred; rather, it also requires the party to show how the changes have adversely affected the purpose of the covenant."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hrisomalos v. Smith“the weight attributed to these changes should not be as great as that accorded changes which have occurred within the restricted area.”
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.