Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 KAN 358 - Kruse v. Conklin

Kruse v. Conklin’s Empirical Analysis

1910

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
4
states following
June 1968
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 1968

8 state decisions

40191019201930194019501960decided

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 Lake v. Hancock ex rel. Payne · Holden v. Garrett · Morris v. Wicks · Western Grocer Co. v. Alleman · Nickerson v. Wells-Stone Mercantile Co.

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

  1. ““The reason of the rule that the burden of proof as to the payment of a valuable consideration rests upon a subsequent purchaser is that, while the recital in a deed that the consideration has been paid is prima facie evidence, as between the parties, it is no evidence against a stranger. [Citing cases.] Other reasons given for the rule are that the knowledge and means of .proving the consideration are more reasonably and naturally in the possession of the grantee and the difficulty which ordinarily arises where an. attempt is made to prove the negative rather than the affirmative of a proposition. “As to notice, it will be observed that the rule is equally well established that the burden is on the one who claims under the prior unrecorded deed. At least this is true as soon as it is established that the subsequent purchaser parted with value. Many of the courts take the view that the burden of proof as to the good faith of the subsequent purchaser shifts as soon as the last purchaser has shown that he paid a valuable consideration. [Citing cases.] As soon as it appears that a valuable considera-' tion has been paid, the presumption arises that the purchaser acted in good faith and without notice of the rights of the parties who claimed under the unrecorded deed.””
    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.