Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 211 Ark. 440 - Koonce v. Woods

Koonce v. Woods’s Empirical Analysis

1947

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
September 2001
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently September 2001 · most notably Barclay v. Tussey (1976), United States Gypsum Co. v. Greif Bros. Cooperage Corp. (1968)

4 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

901947195019601970198019902000decided

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 United States v. Chaves · Towson v. Denson · Schmeltzer v. Scheid · Wallace v. Hill · Little v. Williams

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

  1. “Under its sovereign power, a State imposes the burden upon all its citizens to pay taxes on the property owned by them for the purpose of supporting the government. It is the duty of the officers of the State to place the land in the State on the tax books for that purpose as soon as the State has parted with its title to them. Hence where the State has for a long time demanded and collected taxes on property and the property owner has acquiesced therein by paying the taxes, there arises a presumption that there was a legal liability to pay the taxes, and this furnishes a strong circumstance from which a court may infer a grant from the State. Of course, from the very nature of the thing the person or persons paying the taxes must be in the uninterrupted and continued possession of the land in order to warrant the court in finding a grant from the State. In such cases the possession of the adverse claimants could have had a legal inception, and the doctrine of presumption of a grant from the State under such circumstances is recognized in many cases.”
    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.