Coleman v. Coleman

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating the statute of frauds “prevent[s] existing estates in land from being upset by parol evidence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Dawson v. McNaney
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1950-11-13· cited 25×
• Owens v. M.E. Schepp Ltd. Partnership
  Arizona Supreme Court· 2008-05-08· cited 22×
• Barnette v. McNulty
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1973-12-13· cited 19×
• Bishop v. Bishop
  Third Circuit· 1958-05-01· cited 14×
• Spector v. Ahrenholz
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1958-11-25· cited 10×
• Grim v. Cheatwood
  Supreme Court of Oklahoma· 1953-04-21· cited 4×
• Owens v. M.E. Schepp Ltd. Partnership
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 2007-08-23· cited 4×
• Bishop v. Bishop
  Third Circuit· 1958-08-19· cited 1×

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Gorrell v. Alspaugh
  Supreme Court of North Carolina· 1897-02-15· cited 36×
• Stewart v. McLaughlin's Estate
  Michigan Supreme Court· 1901-02-27· cited 21×
• Mahon v. Leech
  North Dakota Supreme Court· 1902-05-15· cited 16×