Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 103 SO3D 343 - Udomeh v. Joseph

Udomeh v. Joseph’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
March 2022
most recently cited

10 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 616 So. 2d 1234 - Everything on Wheels Subaru, Inc. v. Subaru South, Inc. · Federal Insurance Co. v. Insurance Co. of No. Amer. · 314 So. 2d 350 - Trahan v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company · 298 So. 2d 848 - Cox v. WM Heroman & Co., Inc. · 5 So. 3d 819 - Hood v. Cotter

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

  1. “A man may institute an action to establish his paternity of a child at any time except as provided in this Article. The action is strictly personal. If the child is presumed to be the child of another man, the action shall be instituted within one year from the day of the birth of the child. Nevertheless, if the mother in bad faith deceived the father of the child regarding his paternity, the action shall be instituted within one year from the day the father knew or should have known of his paternity, or within ten years from the day of the birth of the child, whichever first occurs. In all cases, the action shall be instituted no later than one year from the day of the death of the child. The time periods in this Article are peremptive. The court in Udomeh further noted: [Ujnder this Court’s jurisprudence, a party bringing a wrongful death and survival claim must establish filiation in accordance with the requirements and temporal limitations of the Civil Code. Further, the revision comments to La Civ.Code art. 198 indicate a putative father must timely file an avowal action pursuant to Article 198 in order to bring a wrongful death and survival action. One purpose of the temporal restrictions of Article 198 is “that a father who failed during a child’s life to assume his parental responsibilities should not be permitted unlimited time to institute an action to benefit from the child’s death.” La. Civ.Code art. 198, Official Revision Comments (d). 14Accordingly, we conclude ”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “| ¡¡To recover under a claim for wrongful death and survival, a plaintiff must fall within the class of persons designated as a beneficiary under La. Civ.Code arts. 2315.1 and 2315.2. Turner v. Busby, 03-3444, p. 4 (La.9/9/04); 883 So.2d 412, 416 . When the decedent leaves no surviving spouse or child, the decedent’s surviving father and mother are the proper beneficiaries to bring a wrongful death and survival action. La.Civ.Code arts. 2315.1; 2315.2. Filiation is the legal relationship between a child arid his parent. La.Civ. Code art. 178. Filiation is established by proof of maternity, paternity, or adoption.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “"[T]he function of the exception of no right of action is to determine whether the plaintiff belongs to the class of persons to whom the law grants the cause of action asserted in the suit." Hood v. Cotter , 08-0215, p. 17 (La. 12/2/08), 5 So.3d 819 , 829. In contrast, an exception of lack of procedural capacity "challenges the right of a party to proceed (although the party may be asserting a real and actual interest) because of some procedural incapacity such as minority." Woodlawn Park Ltd. P'ship v. Doster Constr. Co., Inc. , 623 So.2d 645 , 646 n. 5 (La.1993).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.