Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 197 SW2D 511 - Briggs v. Hendricks

Briggs v. Hendricks’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
7
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently May 2018

19 state decisions

5019461950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Baker v. Henderson · Baker v. Henderson · Semple v. Schwarz · Liebler v. . Shubert · Schweid v. Storandt

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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““[T]he purpose of restricting lots in additions to cities to residential use is to establish an area free from commercial activity, and thereby enhance the value of such lots as residential property. The word ‘residential’ as used in a covenant restricting the use of property, is used in contradistinction to ‘business’ or ‘commerce.’ ””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “1) All lots shall have a garage, either attached or detached, for not less than two cars nor more than three cars. 2) No . . . exterior addition to or alteration . . . shall be made unless and until (i) a preliminary site plan . .. [has] been submitted to and approved in writing by the Architectural Control Committee, and thereafter (ii) the final working plans and specifications for the work shown on the preliminary site plan and schematic plan have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Architectural Control Committee as to compliance with this Declaration and as to harmony of external design and location. 3) No noxious or offensive trade or activity shall be carried on upon any lot nor shall anything be done thereon which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood.”
    2 later decisions 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.