Smith v. Williamson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““* * * intent and meaning of Sec. 411.120, KRS is no open question. We have construed it to mean that in order to maintain an action to quiet title, plaintiff must allege and prove he is in actual possession. This has been the ruling since the enactment of the statute, beginning, perhaps, with Brandenburgh v. Louisville Tin & Stove Co., 36 S.W. 7 , 18 Ky.Law Rep. 297, and adhering down to Davis v. Daniel, 295 Ky. 717 , 175 S.W.2d 501 , and Rose v. Rose, 296 Ky. 18 , 176 S.W.2d 122 . * * *””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Haws v. Short

2. “The pertinent part of KRS 411.120 is: “Any person having both the legal title and possession of land may prosecute suit, * * * in the circuit court of the county where the land or some part of it lies, against any other person setting up a claim to it.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Haws v. Short