Heron v. Ramsey’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently November 2010
22 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 N. H. Ranch Co. v. Gann · State Bank of Commerce v. Speidel · State v. Board of Trustees of Las Vegas · King v. Doherty · Dickerson v. Montoya
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[T]he description furnish[es] the key to the identification of the land intended to be conveyed,” Smith v. Fed{.1 Land Bank, 181 Ga. 1 , 181 S.E. 149, 150 [ (1935) ]; or if the description is “either certain in itself, or capable of being reduced to certainty by a reference to something extrinsic to which the deed refers,” Buckhorn Land & T. Co. v. Yarbrough, 179 N.C. 335 , 102 S.E. 630, 631 [ (1920) ]; or “if there appears therein enough [in the description] to enable one, by pursuing an inquiry based upon the information contained in the deed, to identify the particular property to the exclusion of [all] others,” Coppard v. Glasscock, 46 S.W.2d 298, 300 [ (Tex.Com.App.1932) ]; or if the deed itself furnishes “the means of identification,” Ault v. Clark, 62 Ind.App. 55, 112 N.E. 843, 845 [ (1916) ]; or if the description “can be made certain [by] inquiries suggested by the description given in such deed,” Ford v. Ford, 24 S.D. 644 , 124 N.W. 1108 [(1910)]; or the description in a deed must be sufficiently certain to identify the land therefrom or furnish the means with which to identify it, Hamilton v. Rudeen, 112 Or. 268 , 224 P. 92 [ (1924) ].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Property may be legally taxed in this state, whether listed in the name of the owner, an unknown owner, or one not connected with the title. The statute requiring ’a description * * * such as would be sufficient in a deed to identify it so that title thereto would pass,’ and applying to all assessments however listed, and to be aided only ‘by means of data furnished by the description itself’ irrespective of whether it is listed in the name of the owner, named or unknown, or one having no interest in the property, * % * »”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Richards v. Renehan““* * * Such declaration shall be made of all property * * * and it shall show all the property belonging to, claimed by, or in the possession or under the control or management of, the person making the declaration * * * together with a statement of the county in which the property is situated or which it is liable to taxation, and a description of all real estate, such as would be sufficient in a deed to identify it so. that title thereto would pass, * * * .” (Emphasis ours.)'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Richards v. Renehan
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.