Lines v. Digges’s Empirical Analysis
1908
Citation profile
3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently February 2003
3 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 Waddingham v. Dickson · Barnett v. Jaynes · McDonough v. Merten · Bertha Gold Mining & Milling Co. v. Burr · Hale v. Sweet
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““And it seems to us that it is just as essential to state in the deed, in its prescribed place, a description of the property sold, by reference or otherwise, as it is to recite that the property was strbjet to taxation.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Evans v. Doolittle““The second description [the lands sold] should be of the same particularity as the first [the lands assessed], but any apt words which clearly indicate the property ¡bid for and sold will he sufficient.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Evans v. Doolittle
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.