Brown v. Cahanson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The parties agree that they had an express easement. An easement is “ ‘an interest in the land in the possession of another which entitles the owner of such interest to a limited use or enjoyment of the land in which the interest exists.’ ” Knight v. Madison, 2001 S.D. 120 , ¶ 4, 634 N.W.2d 540, 541 (citing Gilbert v. KTI, Inc., 765 S.W.2d 289, 293 (Mo.Ct.App.1988) (citations omitted)). South Dakota law recognizes a “right of taking water” as an easement “that may be attached to other land as incidents or appurtenances.” SDCL 43-13-2. Additionally, “[t]he extent of a servitude is determined by the terms of the grant, or the nature of the enjoyment by which it was acquired.” SDCL 48-13-5.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brown v. Hanson

2. “That this Agreement shall be binding upon Brown, Hanson and their respective heirs, successors, and assigns, and shall be considered to be a covenant running with the land.... The parties agree that the well located upon the Hanson [pjroperty shall be utilized to provide water service to both the Hanson [pjroperty and the Brown [pjroperty. The parties each agree to use the water from the well for domestic purposes only and neither party shall sell any water from the well, without written consent of the other party.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Brown v. Hanson