Freiburger v. Fry’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 2016
14 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 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Adams v. Betz · 153 Ind. App. 504 - Lacy v. White · Erdman v. White · May v. Anderson
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The line agreement need not be express and may be inferred from the parties' actions, but there must be evidence of some agreement as to the boundary line. Use and improvement of the land up to the alleged boundary line may be sufficient to satisfy the requirement of an agreement if the adjoining landowner acquiesces. Ownership of the land in this manner vests in the parties even though the property has not been held for the statutory period required under a theory of adverse possession.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the defendant made certain statements regarding the plaintiff's ownership of the land in question, that the statements were untrue, uttered with malice, and caused the plaintiff pecuniary loss.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Davis v. Sponhauer“This line agreement is not only binding on those parties who agree but also their successors in interest so long as there was no fraud present in the making of the agreement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Piles v. Gosman
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.