Brown v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““. . . In construing instruments our courts are governed by certain well established rules. A written instrument, not alleged to be ambiguous, must be construed so as to carry out the primary intent of the parties. It must be considered as a whole and given its reasonable, natural and probable meaning. It must be interpreted according to the obvious import of its language without resorting to a subtle or a forced construction. One clause cannot be considered by itself; every clause must be considered with reference to the whole instrument as well as with reference to every other clause. Southern Travelers’ Ass’n v. Wright, Tex.Com.App., 34 S.W.2d 823 ; Southwestern Life Ins. Co. v. Houston, Tex.Civ.App., 121 S.W.2d 619 , error refused; Pagel v. Pumphrey, Tex.Civ.App., 204 S.W.2d 58 , writ refused; Green v. Farmers & Merchants State Bank, Tex. Civ.App., 100 S.W.2d 132 , writ refused; Guardian Trust Co. v. Bauereisen, 132 Tex. 396 , 121 S.W.2d 579 .””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Free-Flow Muffler Company v. Kliewer · Pierson v. Palestine Contractors, Inc.