Goodnight v. Phillips’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 1992
2 federal appellate · 9 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 Nardis Sportswear v. Simmons · Hart v. Van Zandt · Wilson v. Scott · Castilleja v. Camero · Goodnight v. Phillips
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.
“Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that the use made by Allan and Andrea Mills of their residence in Camelot, Section IV, is a substantial and distinct violation of the covenant prohibiting non-residential uses? In connection with answering this question you are intstructed [sic] that a substantial and distinct violation is one in which the use of the property complained of is an obtrusive use and not merely incidental to the use of the house as a residence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mills v. Kubena
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.