Putnam v. Ernst’s Empirical Analysis
1925
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently April 1951
14 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 Lattimer v. . Livermore · Codman v. Bradley · Moore v. Curry · Misch v. Lehman · Windemere-Grand Improvement & Protective Ass'n v. American State Bank
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““These restrictions are, in nature, reciprocal negative easements. As to other lots in the subdivision, defendants’ property is here servient, the other lots dominant. While the restrictions remain beneficial to the dominant estate, material violations of them will be enjoined and to the extent that the restrictions remain beneficial. Oliver v. Williams, 221 Mich. 471 ; Kelman v. Singer, 222 Mich. 454 ; Misch v. Lehman, 178 Mich. 225 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““These building restriction cases present such wide difference in facts that, in equity, but few rules can be applied generally. In the main, each case must be determined on its own facts.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Klug v. Kreisch
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.