Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 815 SW2D 285 - Sadler v. Duvall

Sadler v. Duvall’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Hill v. Heritage Resources, Inc. (1998), Marrs & Smith Partnership v. D.K. Boyd Oil & Gas Co. (2005)

2 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

120199120002010decided

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 New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Texas Industries, Inc. · Sullivan v. Barnett · Sayers v. Pyland · Ellis v. Waldrop · Kraft v. Langford

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

  1. “in absence of proof that repair is actually or economically feasible, the injury may be deemed permanent.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The current version of Article 5069-1.05, § 6(g) provides that “[t]he rate of prejudgment interest shall be the same as the rate of postjudgment interest at the time of judgment and shall be computed as simple interest.” Tex.Rev.Cxv.StatANN. art. 5069-1.05, § 6(g) (Vernon Supp.1991). Section 3(a) provides that “judgments earn interest for the period beginning on the day the judgment is rendered and ending on the day the judgment is satisfied. Interest shall be compounded annually” (emphasis added).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Slander of title is defined as a false and malicious statement made in disparagement of a person's title to property which causes him special damage. A cloud on title exists when an outstanding claim or encumbrance is shown which, on its face, if valid, would affect or impair the title of the owner of the property. It is a suit for a specific equitable remedy. (Citations omitted)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.