Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 222 SW2D 697 - Davis v. Field

Davis v. Field’s Empirical Analysis

1949

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
February 1999
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Curdy v. Stafford · Baldwin v. Root · Arambula v. Sullivan · Lamb v. James · Cagle v. Sabine Valley Timber & Lumber Co.

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

  1. “[Hughes] did not represent himself as the owner, but only as one holding pre-emption rights and expecting later to acquire a patent. The grantees in the mineral deed, being charged with knowledge of the law, knew that Hughes had no right to make them a present conveyance of the minerals, and they, as well as Hughes, knew that any severance of minerals before issuance of the patent would be in fraud of the State’s rights in the land.”
    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.