State v. Boyd’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

37 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ . . . .As noted in the Leibacher case, supra, and Annotation 118 A.L.R. 869 , 876, there must be similarity between the tracts, and.the sale must be neither too remote in point of time nor of such a character as to indicate that it did not represent the true value of the property; and it is incumbent on the party offering proof of other sales to show these facts. . . . . ” (Emphasis Supplied) Two text writers have said: “ . . . . As a general rule, the courts exclude evidence of sales under circumstances that do not conform to their concept of a ‘fair market value.’ They admit testimony as to prices paid on sales at public auction, where presumably a ‘willing buyer’ meets a ‘willing seller’ in open competition. On the other hand, they exclude evidence of forced-sale prices......” Orgel on Valuation Under Eminent Domain, Vol. 1, § 140, page 592. “Forced sales usually involve transactions in which there is an element of compulsion either on the part of the seller who is obliged to act with undue haste, thereby affording him an inadequate period in which to effect a reasonable deal, or on the part of the purchaser who for purely personal reasons or necessities is compelled to pay a higher price than an ordinary purchaser would be willing to pay. However, it has been said that there is a presumption, in the technical and proper meaning of that word, that the price of land sold was fixed freely and not under compulsion. In the absence of evidence warranting a finding that a sale”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Knabe v. State

2. “"The Court charges the jury that in arriving at the amount of the award to be made to appellees herein that you cannot consider any possible enhancement to the remainder of appellees' property, there being no evidence of enhancement in value before the Court."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Huggins

3. “the expert witnesses were agreed that the highway did not enhance the value of the remaining portion of appellees' property and there was no evidence that the value of the property was enhanced.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Huggins