Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 27 VT 739 - Butler v. Gale

Butler v. Gale’s Empirical Analysis

1855

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
7
states following
September 1930
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently September 1930

1 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

90185518601870188018901900191019201930decided

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 Kellogg v. Ingersoll · Rich v. Elliot

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

  1. ““The term half is as definite as the whole; and it could scarcely be contended that, if by mistake, the deed had been of the whole lot, parol proof could be received to prove that but half was intended to be conveyed. If a term is equivocal or technical, parol proof may be resorted to, to define it, as we refer to dictionaries, or books of art or science. There are many terms in engineering, which are not altogether familiar to persons uninstructed, and where they occur in contracts or evidence, unless the parties agree in their import, proof of their true import must be resorted to. But it would not be competent to prove that a week, meant four days, or a rod, in engineering, ten feet, or that a solid yard of masonry consisted of but twenty solid feet. The proof offered, and which was received, was of this character, although not altogether so obviously so, as the illustrations given above. The deeds of former owners of the land, although of record, in the registry of deeds, not being referred to in this deed, can neither restrict or extend the import of the terms used.” Butler v. Gale, 27 Vt. 739 -743.”
    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.