Nelson v. Vandemarr’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[Grimstad v. Dordan, 256 Or. 135, 141 , 471 P.2d 778, 781 (1970).] Allowing a neighbor on one's driveway for the purpose of pruning trees is just the sort of use one would expect. Therefore, this evidence does not negate the element of exclusiveness. In Norgard et al. v. Busher et ux., 220 Or. 297, 308 , 349 P.2d 490, 496 (1960), a case similar in aspects, we stated,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Davis v. Chadwick

2. “The claimants' possession need not be absolutely exclusive; it need only be a type of possession which would characterize an owner's use.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Davis v. Chadwick

3. “does not mean absolutely exclusive, but only such use as would be”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Davis v. Chadwick