Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 558 SW2D 660 - Morris v. Ulbright

Morris v. Ulbright’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
April 1998
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Gardner v. Vanlandingham · St. Louis Union Trust Co. v. Hill · Clarkson v. Hatton · Commerce Trust Company v. Weed · Grimes v. Rush

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.

  1. ““The disposition of the property in this case must be controlled by the intent of the grantor as it may be determined within the four corners of the deed.... In this case, the words chosen provide little guidance in and of themselves. However, a wealth of statutory guidance has been provided as to the meaning of the words chosen. The deed itself offers not even the slightest nuance that the grantors intended anything other than the established statutory meaning. If any actual intent may be found at all, it is that the words were chosen precisely to achieve the effect supplied by the statute.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.