35 Wash. App. 238 - Winans v. Ross’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. “A grantor who owns land on both sides of a line he has established as the common boundary is bound by that line. Fralick v. Clark Cy., 22 Wn. App. 156 , 589 P.2d 273 (1978). The line will also be binding on grantees if the land was sold and purchased with reference to the line, and there was a meeting of the minds as to the identical tract of land to be transferred by the sale. Kronawetter v. Tamoshan, Inc., 14 Wn. App. 820 , 545 P.2d 1230 (1976). The common grantor doctrine involves two questions: (1) was there an agreed boundary established between the common grantor and the original grantee, and (2) if so, would a visual examination of the property indicate to subsequent purchasers that the deed line was no longer functioning as the true boundary? Fralick, 22 Wn. App. at 160 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 186 Wash. 2d 556 - Pendergrast v. Matichuk

2. “... for a boundary line established by a common grantor to become binding and conclusive on grantees it must plainly appear that the land was sold and purchased with reference to such line, and that there was a meeting of minds as to the identical tract of land to be transferred by the sale.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Schultz v. Plate

3. “. . . it is not necessary that every grantee, from the time of the inception of the construction and the determination of the boundary, should himself agree that that was the boundary line.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Schultz v. Plate