Crushed Stone Co. v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on City of Harrisonville Mo v. W S Dickey Clay Mfg Co · Brede v. Minnesota Crushed Stone Co. · Kenyon v. Edmundson, Adm'r · Woodrow v. Ewing · McCarthy v. Bunker Hill & Sullivan Mining & Concentrating Co.
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.
““While we recognize that in proper cases, especially those involving businesses upon which the public’s interest, or necessity, depends, the matter of ‘comparative injury’ should be given prominent consideration, this court is among those holding that where damages in an action at law will not give plaintiffs an adequate remedy against a business operated in such a way that it has become a nuisance, and such operation causes plaintiffs substantially (sic) and irremediable injury, they are entitled, as a matter of right, to have same abated, by injunction ‘ * * notwithstanding the comparative benefits conferred thereby or the comparative injury resulting therefrom.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“would be tantamount to holding that, because of the operation of [a certain business operation] before, and at the time, the [plaintiffs] acquired their property, [the operation] could restrict [the neighboring property's] future uses.”
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.