Short v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 2020
21 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 McDonald v. Pless · United States v. Shoshone Tribe of Indians · United States v. Cook · 55 Wash. 2d 344 - MacKay v. MacKay · Egan v. First Nat. Bank of Tulsa
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A. For wrongful injuries to timber upon the land of another, or removal thereof, the measure of damages is not less than three (3) times nor more than ten (10) times such a sum as would compensate- for the actual detriment, unless: • 1. The trespass was casual and involuntary; 2. Committed under the belief that -the timber or land belonged to the trespasser; or 3. The timber was taken by the authority of highway officers for - the purposes of a highway, in which case the damages are a sum equal to the actual detriment, B. The prevailing party shall be entitled to costs' and attorney’s fees. C.For purposes of. this section, the term “timber” shall be,defined as the term is defined by Section 1301-102 of Title 2 of the Oklahoma .Statutes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Young v. Spencer“[Denver] involved an action to recover for damage to an orchard. Therein this Court reversed a jury verdict and judgment where the only evidence of damage was referable to the value of the trees apart from the-soil. There the Court, noted the defendant requested an instruction stating the measure of damage should be the difference between the property immediately before and after the injury. Additionally, the Court noted in passing the expert testimony of valuation of the trees was admissible for jury consideration along with the difference in value before and after damage, but in absence of the latter, reversed the judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Young v. Spencer“Annual crops referred to in 2 O.S. 1971 § 3-82(d) when applied to the production of pecans would refer to damage to one yearly crop without harm to the trees producing that crop. Harm to the trees constitutes damage to the real property itself. ... The Federal Supreme Court has spoken on the issue, stating standing timber is a constituent element of the land itself. ... Annual crops represent a separate, if not distinct, classification of plant material.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Young v. Spencer
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.