Dotson v. Branham’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

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

1. “Clearly the injunction was proper. It is shown beyond controversy that the Branhams owned an undivided threefourths of this coal. That was shown by the records which the defendants testified they had examined. The defendants owned only an undivided one-fourth of this coal. That was all that their grantors owned and all they could convey to the defendants. Those grantors could not by their deed to the defendants convey or diminish the property of the Branhams. The defendants did not contend that they were mining for the benefit of themselves and the Branhams. They asserted in their pleadings and in their evidence that they owned all this coal and that they were mining it for themselves to the exclusion of their co-owners. They had, of course, no right to exclude their co-owners from their interest in the property and appropriate all of it to themselves.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Chosar Corp. v. Owens

2. “whether it was proper to grant an injunction against them as owners of an undivided one-fourth interest in the minerals, whereas they were grantees of all the minerals in the deed from one who owned only an undivided interest therein.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Chosar Corp. v. Owens

3. “and would continue to mine it exclusively for their own benefit and in disregard of the rights of their coowners.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Chosar Corp. v. Owens