Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 56 N.M. 132 - Nelms v. Miller

Nelms v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
4
states following
April 2007
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently April 2007 · most notably Albuquerque National Bank v. Albuquerque Ranch Estates, Inc. (1982), Kammert Bros. Enterprises, Inc. v. Tanque Verde Plaza Co. (1967)

24 state decisions

100195219601970198019902000decided

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 Permian Oil Co. v. Smith · Permian Oil Co. v. Smith · Strong v. Strong · Strong v. Strong · Suburban Homes Co. v. North

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

  1. “The author says: “ * * * Possession does not amount to constructive notice of the nature and extent of the rights of the person in possession, but it puts the purchaser upon inquiry as to such rights. He is bound to pursue the inquiry with diligence, and to ascertain what those rights are. * * * A purchaser who negligently or intentionally fails to inquire as to the fact of possession, or as to the title or interests of the person in possession, is affected with notice of such title or interest as the possessor actually has. * * * tf”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““ ‘ * * * [Wjhere both the parties to a contract of sale have taken considerable latitude in its performance, without manifesting any intention to hold each other to a strict and literal performance, neither party can abruptly rescind for noncompliance without fair warning of an intention to insist upon a literal compliance with the contract in the future. * * *”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““ * * * [T]he right of forfeiture is waived by continuing negotiations, or, where an indefinite extension of time has been granted. * * * ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.