487 So. 2d 815 - Monaghan v. Wagner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A partition in kind is always preferred and will be jealously guarded by this Court”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 601 So. 2d 848 - Unknown Heirs at Law of Blair v. Blair · 603 So. 2d 287 - Shaw v. Shaw

2. “The term "ouster" is used primarily in cases involving a claim of adverse possession by a tenant in common. The meaning of, and what constitutes an ouster was set forth in Nichols v. Gaddis and McLaurin, Inc., 222 Miss. 207 , 75 So.2d 625 , (1955): An ouster is the wrongful dispossession or exclusion by one tenant in common of his cotenants from the common property of which they are entitled to possession. An ouster cannot be proved merely by acts which are consistent with an honest intent to acknowledge the rights of the cotenant. It does not necessarily imply an act accompanied by force. Because of the relationship between tenants in common, possession which in ordinary cases would constitute adverse possession is not sufficient where entry was made as a tenant in common... . In order to establish ouster of cotenants by a tenant in common in possession, the cotenants out of possession must have notice of his adverse claim either "from actual knowledge or as is sometimes vaguely expressed, by acts equivalent thereto", as by conduct so unequivocal that knowledge on the part of the cotenant out of possession must be necessarily presumed... . "The testimony of such knowledge by the other tenants in common must be clear and convincing. Fox v. Wilkins, 201 Miss. 78 , 28 So.2d 577 (1947). It is not enough that the possession to convey title should be apparently adverse but must be such with actual notice to the co-tenants or shown by such acts of repudiation of their claim as are ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 523 So. 2d 1033 - Cheeks v. Herrington

3. “a possession permissive in its inception cannot become adverse to the owner until a positive assertion of a right hostile to the owner is brought to him.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 751 So. 2d 2 - Blalock v. Conzelman