Connot v. Bowden’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 1990
8 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 Kuhlmann v. Platte Valley Irrigation District · Jurgensen v. Ainscow · State Ex Rel. Game, Forestation & Parks Commission v. Hull · Stubblefield v. Osborn · Scoville v. Fisher
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““To prove a prescriptive right to an easement, all the elements of prescriptive use must be generally established by clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence. * * * “The prevailing rule is that where a claimant has shown open, visible, continuous, and unmolested use of land for a period of time sufficient to acquire an easement by adverse user, the use will be presumed to be under a claim of right. The owner of the servient estate, in order to avoid the acquisition of the easement by prescription, has the burden of rebut ting the prescription by showing the use to be permissive. * * * “It is presumed, however, that every man knows the condition and status of his land; and if anyone enters into open and notorious possession of an easement therein under a claim of right, the owner is charged with knowledge thereof. * * [Citations omitted.] Thus there are six elements which must be established by clear and convincing evidence before an easement by prescription will be found to exist.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Svoboda v. Johnson
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.