Watkins v. Balch’s Empirical Analysis
1906
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently May 2002 · most notably 14 Wash. 2d 276 - Mobley v. Harkins (1942), Andersonian Investment Co. v. Wade (1919)
3 federal appellate · 26 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 Morrill v. Mackman. · Dunckel v. . Dunckel · Arbenz v. Exley, Watkins & Co. · Morrison v. Herrick · Coudert v. . Cohn
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““An oral lease, therefore, ■ where possession of the property has been taken, is not void in toto, but it may not be a lease for the term agreed upon. If the rent reserved is to be paid periodically it is a lease good for one of such periods, but subject to be terminated at the end thereof, or at the end of any other of such periods. Thus, under the statute, where one enters into the possession of real property under an oral lease for a definite time with periodic rent reserved, he is not a tenant for the time agreed upon, but a tenant from period to period, corresponding to the times on which rent is payable. Such a lease can be terminated, as the statute provides, by written notice given at the prescribed time before the end of such period. [Citing cases.] “On the other hand, the courts generally hold that, where there is an entry and the payment of rent in advance for a fixed term under an oral lease, the lease is good for an entire term, although the lease lie a longer term than is permitted by the statute; this on the principle that it would be permitting the statute to perpetrate, rather than prevent, frauds if thereunder a landlord may accept rent for a given term and then use the statute to evict the tenant before the end of such term.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““It, of course, is inferable that such improvements would increase the rental value to some extent, but the amount is conjectural, and as the appellants are relying on an equitable principle, the burden was upon them to show that they would suffer some material injury if the ordinary rules of law were enforced against them.””
2 later decisions 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.