Crabtrey v. Tew’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 54 Ala. App. 198 - Hall v. State · Florence v. Williams · State v. Central of Georgia Railroad Company · 54 Ala. App. 194 - McGowin Investment Company v. Johnstone · McDonald v. State
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In the present case, the route of access which Tew might have over his brothers' property could be cut off at any time, which made this route of access questionable and subject to being obstructed. Such a situation authorizes a proceeding by Tew to gain access to the nearest public road. "The Crabtreys contend that Tew should be given access over his brothers' land and should not be allowed access over the lands of a stranger, since both Tew's property and that of his brothers comes from a common grantor."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Key v. Ellis“The [James] Tew property [was] neither adjacent to nor contiguous to any public road or right-of-way. The Crabtrey property [lay] between the [James] Tew property and an unnamed paved county road. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Key v. Ellis“divided her property among her children. Each of the children, except James Tew, was conveyed parcels of land that fronted on a public road. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Key v. Ellis
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.