Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 323 Ark. 522 - Holaday v. Fraker

Holaday v. Fraker’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
2
states following
February 2018
most recently cited

70 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably 60 Ark. App. 27 - Jennings v. Burford (1997), Cochran v. Bentley (2007)

70 state decisions

340199620002010decided

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 Riddick v. Streett · Hercules Inc. v. Pledger · McGuire v. Bell · Harbour v. NORTHWEST LAND CO. INC. · Ingram v. Wirt

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

  1. “[Restrictions upon the use of land are not favored in the law. Further, a restrictive covenant will be strictly construed against limitations on the free use of land. Thus, all doubts are resolved in favor of the unfettered use of land. Any restriction on the use of land must be clearly apparent in the language of the asserted covenant. Where the language is clear and unambiguous, the parties will be confined to the meaning of the language employed, so long as the meaning does not defeat the plain and obvious purpose of the provision. In addition, we have said that the general rule governing the interpretation, application, and enforcement of restrictive covenants is that the intention of the parties as shown by the covenant governs.”
    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.