Doudna v. Harlan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ The plaintiffs next complain that ‘ the court erred in finding that the bidding off of the lots in controversy by Labette county was a sale.’ The contention of the plaintiff is that, when the county bids off property at a tax sale, it does not become a purchaser, but simply bids off the property, and holds it until some one pays the taxes and penalties thereon, and takes an assignment of the bid from the county; and that in such case there is no sale of the property until it is assigned by the county to the party paying the county the taxes, penalties, and costs thereon. We do not think this position is tenable. There is but one sale mentioned in the statute, and that very clearly refers to the bidding off of the property at the time it is advertised to be .sold for the taxes. Nor do we think it any less a sale, because it is bid off by the treasurer for the county, than when bid off by some person for himself or some other individual. The ‘ bidding off ’ of the property by the treasurer in the name of the county and for the county, has been constantly treated as a sale by the bench and bar of the state. If the county is not a purchaser when property is so bid off, who is the owner in the meantime ? The former owner has lost his title except so far as he has the right of redemption. No third party has obtained any interest therein as yet, and there must be some person, natural or artificial, in whom the ownership of the property rests. Besides, if the county has obtained no”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State ex rel. Taylor v. Maple