Beetschen v. Shell Pipe Line Corporation’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently October 2010 · most notably Wells v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company (1970), Ossman v. Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. (1974)
6 federal appellate · 59 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 Brown v. Weare · St. Louis, Keokuk & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Clark · In Re Adoption of Duren v. Hicks · Wolff v. Campbell · Prairie Pipe Line Co. v. Shipp
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * the basic fact is that it is the corporate entity, the Shell Pipe Line Corporation, that has been invested with the right to exercise the power of eminent domain Section 523.010 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S. By reason of that fact the condemnation proceeding was instituted, amended and prosecuted to a conclusion in the name of the Shell Pipe Line Corporation and the title, right or interest condemned and acquired by reason of that proceeding, the specifically limited subsurface easement, vested in the Shell Pipe Line Corporation.””
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.