Gammill v. Mann’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘Defendant next contends that the statute requires that payment of the amount due be made to the collector of taxes and that complainant made - no such payment or tender of payment. Complainant did call on the collector of taxes, and endeavored to ascertain from that official how much he was required to pay to redeem the property from all the tax sales. The collector declined to inform him, or to accept any money from him, and referred complainant to defendant for settlement and payment. Complainant was entitled to the information he sought from the collector, and, failing to obtain it, he was practically refused the right to redeem, and it would have been idle for complainant to have tendered the collector any sum of money after the collector had declined to deal with complainant.’ Gonzales v. Harrington Co., Inc., 126 A. 40 , 2 N.J.Misc. 316; Id., 126 A. 38, 40 , 2 N.J.Misc. 311.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Fernandez Co. v. Montoya

2. ““We indicated in State ex rel. McFann v. Hately, 34 N.M. 86 , 278 P. 206, 208 , that this redemption statute should be liberally construed in favor of the landholder, stating: ‘Redemption cannot be prevented by the fault or mistake of the collecting officer whose duty it is to furnish to the taxpayer the requisite information.’ “This seems to be the general rule.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Fernandez Co. v. Montoya