Collins v. Rodgers’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘Where the owner of a tract of land adopts a general scheme for its improvement, dividing it into lots, and conveying these with uniform restrictions as to the purposes for which the lands may be used, such restrictions create equitable easements in favor of the owners of the several lots, which may be enforced in equity by any one of such owners. Such restrictions are not for the benefit of the grantor only, but for the benefit of all purchasers. The owner of each lot has as appurtenant to his lot a right in the nature of an easement upon the other lots, which he may enforce in equity. “ ‘Whether such restriction creates a right which inures to the benefit of purchasers is a question of intention, and to create such right it must appear from the terms of the grant, or from the surrounding circumstances, that the grantor intended to create an easement in favor of the purchaser.’ ””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 963 So. 2d 55 - Hun Es Tu Malade? 16, LLC v. Tucker · 61 So. 3d 1012 - Heatherwood Holdings, LLC v. First Commercial Bank

2. “"`Where evidence is presented to the trial court ore tenus , a presumption of correctness exists as to the court's conclusions on issues of fact; its determination will not be disturbed unless it is clearly erroneous, without supporting evidence, manifestly unjust, or against the great weight of the evidence. However, when the trial court improperly applies the law to the facts, no presumption of correctness exists as to the court's judgment.' " American Petroleum Equip. Constr., Inc. v. Fancher , 708 So.2d 129 , 132 (Ala. 1997) (citations omitted)."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cooper v. Ziegler · 40 So. 3d 683 - Kappa Sigma Fraternity v. Price-Williams

3. ““ ‘Nor is it necessary that the restrictive covenant running with the land should be incorporated in the defendant’s deed to take it out of the influence of the statute of frauds; the servitude may be laid on the property by a separate writing, to which he is not a party, if he is in privity with and claiming under one of the parties thereto, and has notice thereof. “ ‘Here the servitude was laid on the property by the conveyance made by Brown, Duskin & Heilpern to complain ant in pursuance of the general scheme of improvement, affecting not only the lots conveyed to complainant, but unsold lots then held by complainant’s grantors, including the lots afterwards sold to the defendant. “ ‘This doctrine is neither strange nor anomalous, as appears from the numerous authorities collected in the note to 21 A.L.R. pages 1300-1326, and finds a striking analogy in the doctrine, often recognized by the court, that where the owner of land lays it off in lots, blocks, and streets, as a subdivision, and the sale of lots is made in reference thereto, and purchases are made on the faith of the act, this operates as a dedication of the street and gives the several lot owners an easement thereon, and this is so without reference to the statute. ‘“On the other hand, it would be strange indeed to hold that one may lay off a subdivision for strictly residential purposes, as a general scheme of improvement, and sell and convey to numerous purchasers on the faith thereof, incorporating in their d”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 61 So. 3d 1012 - Heatherwood Holdings, LLC v. First Commercial Bank · Heatherwood Holdings, LLC. v. First Commercial Bank (In Re Heatherwood Holdings, LLC.)