Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1999 SD 49 - Beck v. Lapsley

Beck v. Lapsley’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 140 Cal. App. 2d 185 - Strangman v. Duke · Neel v. First Federal Savings & Loan Assoc. · Dahn v. Trownsell · Eccleston v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. · Kingman v. O'Callaghan

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

  1. “Section 3223: It [the homestead] may contain one or more lots or tracts of land with the buildings thereon and other appurtenances, subject to the limitations contained in the next section. ... Section 3224: If within a town plat it must not exceed one acre in extent, and if not within a town plat it must not embrace in the aggregate more than 160 acres.... [S]ection 3215: The homestead of every family resident in this state, as hereinafter defined, to the extent of $5,000 in value, whether such homestead be owned by the husband or wife, so long as it continues to possess the character of a homestead, shall be exempt from judicial sale, from judgment lien, and from all mesne or final process from any court.... Hansen, 166 N.W. at 428 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The purpose of statutory construction is to discover the true intention of the law which is to be ascertained primarily from the language expressed in the statute. The intent of a statute is determined from what the legislature said, rather than what the courts think it should have said, and the court must confine itself to the language used. Words and phrases in a statute must be given their plain meaning and effect. When the language in a statute is clear, certain and unambiguous, there is no reason for construction, and the Court’s only function is to declare the meaning of the statute as clearly expressed.”
    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.