Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 705 SW2D 940 - Arthur v. Martin

Arthur v. Martin’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
December 2007
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Croley v. Round Mountain Coal Company · Suppinger v. Caplinger · 80 Tex. Crim. 232 - Hill v. State · Chaney v. Chaney · Tresslar Co., Inc. v. Fritts

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

  1. “[T]he intention of the parties must be looked at to determine what interest was conveyed. In determining the intention of the parties, courts look at the whole deed, along with the circumstances surrounding its execution, and courts may also consider the acts of the parties following the conveyance.”
    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.