Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 33 Okla. 458 - Link v. Schlegel

Link v. Schlegel’s Empirical Analysis

1912

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
May 1961
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently May 1961

23 state decisions

70191219201930194019501960decided

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 De Graw v. Prior · Womack v. Powers · Necklace v. West · Clay v. Sloan · Boyle v. Boyle

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

  1. ““The action of forcible entry and detainer is possessory in its nature, and has for its purpose the restitution of possession of lands and tenements to one who has been deprived' of such possession by force. The right to maintain the action is not determined by plaintiff’s right of possession, but by whether he has been in possession and such possession has been taken from him by force, and, unless othervise provided by statute, a person who has never been in possession of lands cannot maintain the action.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““It is apparent that the foregoing statute contemplates that the result of the action shall be a means of restoring possession of lands .and tenements to persons who are deprived thereof in one of the two ways named, to wit, by an unlawful and forcible entry and detention, or by an unlawful and forcible detention after a lawful and peaceable entry. In each instance, however, the possession of the complaining person must have been entered either unlawfully or lawfully; and in the second case held by force. Statutory provisions similar to the foregoing are generally construed by the courts not to authorize one who has never been in possession to maintain the action.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “• “Under the succeeding section of the statute the action may be maintained in some instances by plaintiff who has never been in possession.””
    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.