Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 249 SW 514 - Vergara v. Kenyon

Vergara v. Kenyon’s Empirical Analysis

1923

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 1971
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently February 1971

4 state decisions

20192319301940195019601970decided

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.

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

  1. ““Appellee brought this suit to recover against appellant survey No. 1671 for 640' acres of land in Webb county located by virtue of script issued to O. C. S. D. R. G. N. Ry. Co. “The defense was not guilty and the ten-year statute of limitations. “The case was tried before the court without a jury, and a judgment was entered for the appellee, based upon the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, made and filed by the court, to wit: “ ‘Findings of Fact. “ ‘First. I find as a fact that the plaintiff, Clark M. Kenyon, is vested with the record title to the tract of land in controversy, viz., survey No. 1671, certificate No. 1169, grantee, C. C. S. D. R. G. N. R. R. Co., abstract No. 1127, in Webb county, Tex., containing 640 acres of land. “ ‘Second. That defendant, Ygnacio Vergara, in the year 1907 inclosed the tract of land in controversy with five other surveys of 640 acres each, and since said date up to the present time has complied with all the requirements of the ten-year statute of limitation, and is entitled to recover unless precluded by the provisions of articles 5677 and 5678, R. S. No part of survey 1671 has been used by him for agricultural or manufacturing purposes, and there are no improvements thereon except the fence on the east and north sides. “ ‘Third. That the fence inclosing said pasture where said survey is located runs along the eastern and northern boundary line of said survey, and forms a partition fence between the pasture where the tract ”
    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.