Jones v. Weiss’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “If no use can be made of land conveyed or retained without the benefit of an easement, it is assumed that the parties intended the easement to be conveyed. This is true not only where it is claimed by the conveyor but also where it is claimed by the conveyee. It is assumed that the parties could not have intended that the land retained by the conveyor should be useless in his hands, though the assumption may not have too firm a foundation in fact. The inference as to intention which is made is influenced largely by considerations of public policy in favor of land utilization. [[Image here]] If the necessity of-an easement is such that without it the land camnmot be effectively wsed, nothing less than explicit language in the conveyance negating the creation of the easement will prevent its implication.... (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2009 OK CIV APP 89 - Johnson v. Suttles

2. “where the conveyor of land retained a landlocked portion, the law implies that a way of necessity was intended, unless contrary intent is inescapably manifested.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. CHILDERS v. ARROWOOD