Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 207 PA 71 - Paschall v. Fels

Paschall v. Fels’s Empirical Analysis

1903

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
November 1959
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently November 1959

4 state decisions

10190319101920193019401950decided

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 Karns v. Tanner · Sutherland v. Ross · Chase v. Irvin · Arthurs v. King

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. ““Clearly, the thing in controversy was the alleged easement claimed by the plaintiff; if plaintiff had abandoned the easement, then the land of the grantor unincumbered by it was in the grantor Elizabeth Connell and her conveyance to the defendant passed the land to him free from it; he, the defendant of record, represented her, and plaintiff’s testimony was directly hostile to the alleged claim of the mother established by the conveyance of the street to defendant; by Elizabeth Connell’s own act her right to the thing in action had passed to Fels; but according to plaintiff’s testimony the right of the mother to impair or deprive the daughter of the easement did not exist. The case, it seems to us, is within the express words of the act of 1887, which are the same as those of the act of 1869, under which Earns v. Tanner, 66 Pa. 297 , was decided, which was followed by Arthurs v. King, 84 Pa. 525 , Chase v. Irvin, 87 Pa. 286 , and many other cases. All invariably hold that a witness cannot make title in himself by his own testimony of what occurred in the lifetime of his grantor, that grantor being dead” (Italics supplied.)”
    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.