James v. Eagle Rock Ranch’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently August 2014
8 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 68 Tex. Crim. 295 - Burford v. State · Henry v. Phillips · Coalson v. Holmes · Thomson v. Locke · Tunstill v. Scott
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It has been held many times that a suit by a grantor to rescind a conveyance of land for fraud and to recover the land is within subd. 14 * * * “ * * * We cannot convince our- selves, however, that a suit by the grantee, as here, comes within any of the specific provisions of subd. 14. “Appellants’ suit is not to recover lands. It is just the opposite. It is a suit to divest themselves of title to land.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Miller v. Lochridge““Eagle Rock Ranch members have an easement over the entire ranch. In other words, members of the club have all the pleasure rights over the entire ranch property”
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.