Edmonds v. Thurman’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2016
9 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 Dardick v. Dardick · Teson v. Vasquez · Dambach v. James · Boeckmann v. Fitzpatrick · Barley v. Fisher
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“and the court in that case said: The intent to take actual possession of such land requires less actual exercise of ownership by affirmative act than is required when the land is suitable for eul-tivation. Even so, occasional possessory acts, such as occasional use of the land for pasture or gathering up firewood or similar isolated acts, amount to nothing more than occasional trespasses which do not establish adverse possession. Id. at 410-11 (citations omitted). The court in Edmonds also held that maintenance by the party claiming adverse possession of an”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“continual acts of occupying, clearing, cultivating, pasturing, erecting fences or other improvements and paying taxes”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Murphy v. Holman“'must show physical possession of the entire area claimed'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Murphy v. Holman
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.