Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 271 SW2D 685 - Proctor v. Markham

Proctor v. Markham’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
December 1969
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Permian Oil Co. v. Smith · Permian Oil Co. v. Smith · Weatherly v. Jackson · Dikes v. Miller · W. T. Waggoner Estate v. Sigler Oil Co.

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

  1. ““ * * * No overt acts by appellants and their predecessors in title are alleged or proved. We think that before the rule as laid down in Miller v. Yates, supra, would apply, the appellant must have requested and received a patent on said Estes field notes. This has not been done, and we hold ihat they have not lost any rights they had under the original field notes.” (Emphasis supplied)”
    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.