Jones v. Lustig’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently August 2003
14 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 Clark Lumber Co. v. Passig · Adair v. Transcontinental Oil Co. · Powers v. Badger Lumber Co. · F. M. Spalding Lumber Co. v. Slusher · Doane v. Bever
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where the statute requires service on the owner of the notice of the filing of a mechanic’s lien, the statutory language must be literally observed and notice must be served upon the owner himself. (36 Am. Jur., Mechanics’ Liens § 128.) Our statute does not provide for service of the notice upon an alleged agent or attorney of the owner. . . .” (p. 211.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““There is no privity of contract between a subcontractor and an owner, and a subcontractor can only obtain a lien by compliance with statutory provisions. It is not enough that he has furnished the material and filed his lien, but service of notice upon the owner is one of the necessary steps. Without such notice he obtains nothing. . . .” (Syl. 1.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Equitable considerations do not ordinarily give rise to a mechanic’s lien. . . . Being created by statute, a mechanic’s lien can only arise under the circumstances and in the manner prescribed by the statute. It has been said a lien claimant must secure a hen under the statute or not at all. (Doane v. Bever, 63 Kan. 458 , 65 Pac. 693 .) . . .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.