Phillips v. Dorris’s Empirical Analysis
1898
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently May 2020
1 federal appellate · 9 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 Barr v. Lamaster · Hurste v. Hotaling · Carson v. Dundas · Lynch v. Lynch · Seymour v. Ricketts
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.
““Only a joint tenant or a tenant in common of real estate can maintain an action for its partition. * * * Hurste v. Hotaling, 20 Neb. 178 , 29 N. W. 299 ; Barr v. Lancaster, 48 Neb. 114 , 66 N. W. 1110 . If Miller died intestate, (lie title to tlfé lands which he owned at his death descended to and vested in his heirs at law; if he died leaving a will, the title vested in his devisee on probate of the will. Miller’s administrator was neither a tenant in common nor a joint tenant of such heir or devisee. .* * v The object of a partition suit is to assign property, the tee-simple title to which is held by two or moro persons as joint tenants or tenants in common, to them In severally'.” *”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Logue v. Ferris
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.