Berry v. Hemlepp’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 2009
4 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 Moore v. Stevens · Holliday v. Sphar · Connor v. Clemons · Glenmore Distilleries Co. v. Fiorella · Shoaf v. Bland
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It does not appear necessary to become too deeply immersed in legal refinements and subtle meanings of words or omissions. ... ... The objective of the covenants was clearly to restrict the use of these lots to residential use. ... Exclusionary adjectives or adverbs were not here required. All that is needed in the present case is a fair and common-sense approach to the objective sought by the language used. The fact that appellant also resides in the house is irrelevant to the question of whether it is utilized for a nonresidential purpose. Berry v. Hemlepp, supra, pág. 353.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.