Harris v. O'Connor’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently November 1993
13 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 Day Land & Cattle Co. v. State · State v. Quintana Petroleum Co. · Wortham v. Walker · Welder v. Lambert · State of Texas v. Bradford
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This provision of the Partidas does not seem to provide that the title to land upon abandonment shall vest in the State. It seems to be in accordance with the common law as to the abandonment of corporeal personal property.” ( 185 S.W.2d at p. 1012 )”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““As has been said, the papers introduced do not appear to reflect all the steps in the granting of these lands. If a survey was made, and the grants recite a survey, and you could hardly expect evidence to be on the ground after the lapse of something over one hundred and eight years, the grantee assumed the obligation of erecting the monuments. Unless a survey had been made, this might be a difficult task. In cases of grants it would seem to be the custom of surveyors to make a map of their field notes. No map of the surveyor or surveyors acting under Commissioner Vidaurri appears. But in view of the long lapse of time, attended not only with the ordinary casualties of time, but with war and revolution, it would not be stranger if same had disappeared. “In our opinion, the delivery of possession has some bearing here on the location of these grants. White v. Holliday, 11 Tex. 606 ; State v. Russell, 38 Tex.Civ.App. 13 , 85 S.W. 288 ; Corrigan v. State, 42 Tex.Civ.App. 171 , 94 S.W. 95 ; State v. Corrigan, Tex.Sup., 95 S.W. 101 ; State v. Palacios, Tex.Civ.App., 150 S.W. 229 ; Graham v. United States, 71 U.S. 259 , 4 Wall. 259 , 18 L.Ed. 334 . “Without some marking or indication of boundaries, temporary though they might be, a delivery of juridical possession to an area would seem impossible. Many positive acts and forbearances on the part of the State of Texas extended continuously over a long period of years evidences the area involved in the delivery of such possession.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Some of these gentlemen, after their services as Attorney General ceased, were honored by the people of the State by election to the highest executive and judicial positions within the gift of the people. Before the Act of 1901, above quoted, we think it was in the purview of the duties of the Attorney General to recover for the State land illegally withheld. The Act quoted made it their specific duty to institute legal proceedings on behalf of the State under the conditions named in the law quoted. Are we to assume that these honored, distinguished and able gentlemen neglected their duty? or are we to apply the presumptions that they discharged their official duty with fidelity and diligence? The answer is, we think, that they are presumed to have discharged their official duty with fidelity and diligence.””
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.