Lambert v. Murray’s Empirical Analysis
1911
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 1989
14 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 Morris & Thombs v. St. Louis National Bank · Wall v. Magnes · Churchill v. . Onderdonk · Empire Ranch & Cattle Co. v. Coldren · Sheppard v. Nixon
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Under all the decisions of this court, the assertion of an adverse title in the defendant, with a specification of its nature, coupled in the same defense with denial of the possession of the plaintiff (if such- a denial is necessary), is sufficient to put the plaintiff upon proof of his title and possession, and, under such circumstances, the proof of the one is as necessary for the maintenance of the action as the proof of the other.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Strauss v. Thomas
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.