Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 264 Ala. 339 - King v. Jackson

King v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

1956

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
2
states following
September 1973
most recently cited

70 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently September 1973 · most notably Roan v. Smith (1961), McLaney v. Turner (1958)

70 state decisions

440195619601970decided

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 Louisville and Nashville Railroad Co. v. Tucker · Roan v. McCaleb · Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. McDaniel · Life Casualty Ins. Co. of Tennessee v. Womack · Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. State

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

  1. ““1. For that the verdict of the jury and the judgment of the court is con trary to the great weight of the evidence. “2. For that the verdict of the jury and the judgment of the court is contrary to the great weight of the evidence in that the legal evidence on the lands sued for fails to show such possession as will establish prescription on the part of the defendant. “9. For that the verdict of the jury and the judgment of the court is contrary to the evidence in that the legal evidence concerning the property described in the complaint did not meet the requirements of the law for prescription. “11. For that the verdict of the jury and the judgment of the court is contrary to the evidence in that it is based on evidence admitted concerning the occupancy of a tract or parcel of land which was not involved in the litigation nor described in the complaint. “12. For that the verdict of the jury and the judgment of the court is contrary to the evidence in that the court erroneously admitted evidence of the occupancy of the 4-acre tract exception in said complaint.””
    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.