Marquez v. Padilla’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently January 1999 · most notably Grace v. Koch (1998), Archuleta v. Pina (1974)
4 federal appellate · 42 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 Martinez v. Mundy · Thurmond v. Espalin · Merrifield v. Buckner · Christmas v. Cowden · Montoya v. Unknown Heirs of Vigil
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * The test in every case, as in the case of contracts other than deeds, is whether or not the intention of the parties can be discovered and effectuated. If so, unless the rights of third parties intervene to prevent, the deed is valid; if not, it is invalid. So, if a deed contains an indefinite and uncertain description, and the parties, either before the execution of the instruments or after-wards, by agreement, go upon the ground and mark out the boundaries of the land intended to be conveyed, the deed is valid * *”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““No hard and fast rule can be laid down as to exactly what must be done to indicate adverse possession over a given piece of property. The requirements vary according to the nature and situation of the property. The rule announced in Johnston v. City of Albuquerque, 12 N.M. 20, 28 , 72 P. 9, 11 (1903) still holds: “ ‘ * * * Its determination must largely depend upon the situation of the parties, the size and extent of the land, and the purpose for which it is adapted. The only rule which is generally applicable is that the acts relied on to establish possession must always be as distinct as the character of the land reasonably admits of, and must be so exercised as to acquaint the owner, should he visit it, that a claim of ownership adverse to his title is being asserted. * * * ’ See, also, Martinez v. Mundy, 61 N.M. 87, 93 , 295 P.2d 209 (1956); Thurmond v. Espalin, 50 N.M. 109 , 171 P.2d 325 (1946).””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lopez v. Barboa
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.