Cosgrove v. Young’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 7 district · 46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Iola State Bank v. Biggs (1983), Hall v. Mullen (1984)
2 federal appellate · 7 district · 46 state decisions
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 Burden v. Gypsy Oil Co. · Fry v. Dewees · Stith v. Williams · Richards v. Shearer · Shepard v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“by its acts, representations, admissions, or silence when it had a duty to speak, induced [the first party] to believe certain facts existed,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ . . excepting and reserving with right of ingress and egress, an undivided Vi of the landowner’s Vs royalty, or, V32 of the interest in and to all oil, gas or other minerals . . . in or under the said land .... The said royalty reservation shall not be participating in bonuses or rentals, but shall be participating in other rights, royalties and other benefits accruing under any existing or future oil, gas or mineral lease while the said royalty reservation is in full force and effect.’ ” 189 Kan. at 127 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“"We conclude that the trial court correctly held that the instrument was in violation of the rule against perpetuities and, hence, null and void. We are not unmindful that some other jurisdictions might well reach a different result in applying their case law to the issue herein. However, the parties hereto seek no alteration of our existing case law and we see no compelling reason for change."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.