Wetherald v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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

1. “[Bonnell] acknowledges and even stipulates that the [Cotners have] maintained exclusive possession [and] control [ ] of the subject real estate for the ten[-]year period of time, and that said control and possession has been open and notorious. [Bonnell,] however, argues that the [Cot-ners] fail to satisfy Indiana Code [Section] 32-21-7-1, which states: In any suit to establish title to land or real estate, possession of the land or real estate is not adverse to the owner in a manner as to establish title or rights in and to the land or real estate unless the adverse possessor or claimant pays and discharges all taxes and special assessments that the adverse possessor or claimant reasonably believes in good faith to be due on the land or real estate during the period the adverse possessor or claimant claims to have possessed the land or real estate adversely.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tom Bonnell v. Ruby A. Cotner, Douglas Wayne Cotner, Arthur J. Johnson, Jimmy J. Johnson, and Jerry L. Johnson

2. “an appellate court may not impose its own view as to whether the evidence is clear and convincing but must determine, by considering only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the judgment and without weighing evidence or assessing witness credibility, whether a reasonable, trier of fact could conclude that the judgment was established by clear and convincing evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. William Arnold Henry and Mary Ann Henry v. Margo Liebner

3. “the [Echterling ] Court essentially applied the [adverse possession tax] statute to require the adverse claimant to substantially comply with the requirement for payment of taxes. Although the opinion did not expressly mention that the claimant’s failure to pay taxes on the claimed boundary strip was inadvertent and unintentional, we believe that this is the clear implication.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tom Bonnell v. Ruby A. Cotner, Douglas Wayne Cotner, Arthur J. Johnson, Jimmy J. Johnson, and Jerry L. Johnson