Smith v. Persons’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably 486 So. 2d 408 - Hall v. Mazzone (1986), Cotton v. May (1974)
30 state decisions
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 Porter v. Henderson · Teal v. Mixon · Dothard v. Denson · White v. Williams · Savage v. Savage
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘ “[A] permissive occupant cannot change his possession into adverse title no matter how long possession may be continued, in the absence of a clear, positive and continuous disclaimer and disavowal of the title of the true owner brought home to the latter’s knowledge; there must be either actual notice of the hostile claim or acts or declarations of hostility so manifest and notorious that actual notice will be presumed in order to change a permissive or otherwise non-hostile possession into one that is hostile.” ’ “Smith v. Persons, 285 Ala. 48, 55 , 228 So.2d 806, 811 (1968) (quoting Stewart v. Childress, 269 Ala. 87, 93 , 111 So.2d 8, 13 (1959), citing in turn White v. Williams, 260 Ala. 182, 187 , 69 So.2d 847, 851 (1954)).””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“' "Each tenant in common has an equal right to occupy the common freehold, and the exercise of ordinary acts of ownership by one, is not, without more, an adverse holding which can ever ripen into a title. To have that effect there must be an actual ouster, or actual refusal of the co-tenants' right to occupy. Actual occupancy, actual exercise of acts of ownership, actual improvements of the property , may all co-exist, and yet the holding not become adverse to the co-tenant. Eviction, denial of the right to enter, or exclusive claim of the right to occupy must exist, and must be shown to have been made known to the co-tenant, before the possession becomes adverse in law. . . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"[C]ompensation for improvements erected on land will be allowed the improving cotenant only when he was without knowledge of any outstanding interest and, bona fide, believed himself to be the owner of the property." 285 Ala. at 56 , 228 So.2d at 812-13.”
2 later decisions 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.