Logan v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1908
Citation profile
37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently July 1969 · most notably Tribal Development Co. v. White Bros. (1911), Teuscher v. Gragg (1929)
37 state decisions
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 Moore v. Crawford · Newcomb v. Wood · Ryan v. . Dox · Hays v. Reger · Levy v. . Brush
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The third proposition raised by the defendant is one most Insistently argued and contended for both under the allegations of the demurrer and under the proof offered in the'case, and the statute invoked is section 64, art. 4, c. 65, Wilson’s Rev. & Ann. St. 1903, under the title of ‘Uses and Trusts,’ which provides as follows: ‘No trust in relation to real property is valid, unless created or declared: First: By a written instrument, subscribed by the trustee (trustor) or by his agent thereto authorized by writing. Second: By the instrument under which the trustee claims the estate affected; or Third: By operation of law.’ If the petition was good against the demurrer under the statute of frauds, it was also good under the provisions of the statute of uses and trusts. The former statute provides that the contract shall be invalid, and the latter statute provides that no trust in relation to real property is valid unless in writing; but the statute last referred to provides, in addition thereto, ‘unless created or declared by operation of law.’ Under this last provision, the courts have exercised very broad discretion in excepting and taking out of the operation of the statute many cases where accident, fraud, or mistake have intervened, and where it would be inequitable to allow the grantee to retain real property, title to which had been procured under a verbal promise. So that the demurrer must of necessity be overruled for the reason that the petition is not vulnerable ow”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Purcell v. Corder““It would be a sad commentary upon the law of our land if it was such that, leaving out all question of confidential relationship or deceit a man dealing with another could receive from him on a verbal contract a deed to his real property for the purpose of sale and then sell it and appropriate the money, refuse P on demand, and the courts be unable to assist the owner in getting it.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Merfeld v. Anderson““* * * ruie se6ms ¿o be that, ‘if the complaint fails to show whether the contract in suit was verbal or in writing it will be presumed to have been in writing for all the purposes of the demurrer.’ Miles v. Thorne, 38 Cal. 335 , 99 Am. Dec. 384 ; Broder v. Conklin, 77 Cal. 330 , 19 Pac. 513 ; 20 Cyc. 308, and eases cited. Hence the demurrer cannot be sustained on this ground””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Begley v. Beavers
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.