Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1998 OK 16 - Lucas v. Bishop

Lucas v. Bishop’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently August 2023

6 state decisions

401998200020102020decided

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 Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Tidwell · Kerr-McGee Corp. v. Admiral Insurance Co. · Lucas v. Bishop · Cj Restaurant v. Fms Management Systems

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.

  1. “'must be viewed in the context of the contract and must be given [their] plain ordinary meaning.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “All contracts for deed for purchase and sale of real property made for the purpose or with the intention of receiving the payment of money and made for the purpose of establishing an immediate and continuing right of possession of the described real property, whether such instruments be from the debtor to the creditor or from the debtor to some third person in trust for the creditor, shall to that extent be deemed and held mortgages, and shall be subject to the same rules of foreclosure and to the same regulations, restraints and forms as are prescribed in relation to mortgages. No foreclosure shall be initiated, nor shall the court allow such proceedings, unless the documents have been filed of record in the county clerk's office, and mortgage tax paid thereon, in the amount required for regular mortgage transactions. Provided, however, mutual help and occupancy agreements executed by an Indian housing authority created pursuant to Section 1057 of Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes shall not be considered to be mortgages or contracts for deed under the provisions of this section.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The parties agree that Lucas had no right to declare a forfeiture under the contract for deed because of 16 O.S.1991 ¶11A. . . . Consequently, Lucas was required to foreclose his lien in the Bishop property.”
    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.