Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 206 Miss. 887 - Barnes v. Rogers

Barnes v. Rogers’s Empirical Analysis

1949

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
September 2016
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 2016

21 state decisions

8019491950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Daniels v. Jordan · Hathaway v. North · Garrett v. Colvin

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

  1. “Possession, or the right of possession, in the tenants in common gives an absolute and unconditional right to partition however inconvenient it may be to make.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““As a general rule, jurisdiction once acquired is not defeated by subsequent events even though they are of such a character as would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Partition of land held by joint tenants, tenants in common, or coparceners, having an estate in possession or a right of possession and not in reversion or remainder, whether the joint interest be in the free hold or in a term of years not less than five (5), may be made by judgment of the chancery court of that county in which the lands or some part thereof, are situated; or, if the lands be held by devise or descent, the division may be ordered by the chancery court of the county in which the will was probated or letters of administration granted, although none of the lands be in that county. However, any person owning an indefeasible fee simple title to an undivided interest in land may procure a partition of said land and have the interest of such person set apart in fee simple from the claims of life or other tenants, remaindermen or reversioners, provided the life or other tenants, and other known living persons having an interest in the lands, are made defendants if they do not join in the proceeding as plaintiffs.”
    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.