30 Utah 2d 338 - Davison v. Robbins’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently October 2008
13 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 18 Utah 2d 368 - Pitcher v. Lauritzen · 2 Utah 2d 309 - Calder v. Third Judicial District Court · Allen v. Kitchen · 172 Cal. App. 2d 522 - Brudvig v. Renner · 165 Cal. App. 2d 561 - Corona Unified School District v. Vejar
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the space provided for a description of the property, the following was written: legal description to be prepared by licensed civil engineer after survey ordered by seller and paid for equally by both parties hereto, land being sold consists of approx. 150 acres selling at $90.00 per acre on the exact net acreage delivered in escrow. In a space provided for other terms, the following was written: Property in question is briefly described in preliminary title report No. U-102434, Schedule A, issued Oct. 24, 1970 by Stanley and Sons, Inc. of Heber City, Utah, less any acreage reserved by seller. Offer contingent upon buyers approval of net acreage description and grant deed executed and deposited in escrow. [Emphasis added.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Parol evidence may be used for the purpose of identifying the description contained in the writing with its location upon the ground, but not for the purpose of ascertaining and locating the land about which the parties negotiated, and supplying a description thereof which they had omitted from the writing. There is a clear distinction between the admission of oral and extrinsic evidence for the purpose of identifying the land described and applying the description to the property and that of supplying and adding to a description insufficient and void on its face.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hackford v. Snow“the contract grants one party the exclusive right of selection, and the contract thus provides a definite means by which the location and description of the land may be definitely determined without any further agreement of the parties.”
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.