Silver v. Bush’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 federal appellate · 22 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Mineral is not per se a term of art or of trade, but of general language, and presumably is intended in the ordinary popular sense which it bears among English speaking people. It may in any particular case have a different meaning, more extensive or more restricted, but such different meaning should clearly appear as intended by the parties.... [T]he word “mineral” has a very broad meaning ... and also a more restricted scientific use, it has also a commercial sense, in which it is most commonly used in conveyances and leases of land, and in which it may be presumed to be used in such instruments. In that sense[,] it may include any inorganic substance found in nature having sufficient value separated from its situs as part of the earth to be mined, quarried, or dug for its own sake or its own specific uses. But, though it may include all such substances, it does not necessarily do so.... The cardinal test of the meaning of any word in any particular case is the intent of the parties using it....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2011 Pa. Super. 198 - Butler v. Charles Powers Estate

2. ““These offers, however, even if proved, were not evidence that the parties used the term ‘mineral’ in the sense contended for. They could only be ground for inference that the parties might have so intended, while, on the other hand, the offers themselves implied that the including of gas under the term ‘mineral’ would be a new use of the term, and the inference would be strong that, if the parties intended to include gas, they would have said so expressly. The offers, therefore, were properly excluded.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. New York State Natural Gas Corp. v. Swan-Finch Gas Development Corp.

3. ““Certainly such gas is a mineral in the broadest sense of the term, but no evidence was given or offered to show that the parties so understood or intended the word ‘mineral,’ or even that it had acquired a usage in conveyancing which would include gas” (citing Dunham v. Kirkpatrick).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Luse v. Boatman