Portis v. Hill

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]o constitute a disseizin and adverse possession in [the case of a cotenancy], there must be, in the language of the books, an actual ouster.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Harris v. Mayfield
  Texas Commission of Appeals· 1924-04-02· cited 24×
• Mitchell v. Burleson
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 1971-03-25· cited 20×
• Chance v. Branch
  Texas Supreme Court· 1883-02-02· cited 19×
• Houston Oil Co. of Texas v. Ainsworth
  Texas Commission of Appeals· 1921-03-02· cited 9×
• Hill v. Cherokee Construction Co.
  Supreme Court of Arkansas· 1911-04-24· cited 7×
• All Known, Unknown, and Known but Unfound Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Successors, Assigns, and Personal Representatives of Louis and Eliza Eckford v. Lou Eda Korth Stubbs Nixon, FRJK Legacy Family Limited Partnership, Ellen Ann Korth Vickers, John Frederick Vickers, Michael Steven Vickers, Ellen Ann Vickers, and William Korth Vickers
  Tex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 2025-10-08

Other cases named Portis v. Hill

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Portis v. Hill
  Texas Supreme Court· 1855-07-01· cited 21×