Smith v. Hamilton’s Empirical Analysis
1870
Citation profile
41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently February 1950 · most notably Fred Macey Co. v. Macey (1906), Beardsley v. Crane (1893)
41 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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.
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It has been held very generally, that when there has been an honest difficulty in determining the lines between two neighboring proprietors, and they have actually agreed by parol upon a certain boundary as the true one, and have occupied accordingly with visible monuments or divisions, the agreement long acquiesced in shall not be disturbed, although the time has not been sufficient to establish an adverse possession.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Where the transaction has not been such as to amount merely to an honest attempt to determine a doubtful line, the authorities have not permitted an agreement to stand which would operate as a violation of the statute of frauds.”
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.