Comstock v. Little’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently December 2018
9 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 Lewis v. Smith · Moschos v. Bayless · Midland Valley Railroad Co. v. Imler · Howard v. Stanolind Oil & Gas Co. · Goodall v. City of Clinton
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where adjoining landowners occupy their respective premises up to a certain fence line, not erected by them or either of them but which has been mutually recognized and acquiesced in for a long period of time, they are precluded from claiming that the boundary line thus recognized and acquiesced in by their predecessors in title, is not the true line. The length of time of such recognition, acquiescence and occupancy is 15 years as required by 12 O.S.1951 § 93, to acquire title by prescription.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Leach v. West“The character of an action is determined by the nature of the issues framed by the pleadings and the rights and remedies of the parties, and not solely by the form in which the action is brought or by the prayer of relief.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. HERRING v. GRAHAM
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.