110 So. 2d 238 - Cockerham v. Aime’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently May 2013
1 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Federal Trade Commission v. Millers' National Federation · Waller v. Colvin · Standard Oil Co. of Louisiana v. Futral · State v. Standard Oil Co. · Rodgers v. S. H. Bolinger Co.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Considering this controversy is between the parties to a contract and there is an absence of intervening rights of third parties, either party may obtain reformation in order that the act will correctly and accurately reflect and express the true intention of the parties thereto. In this connection, we quote the following language appearing in State v. Standard Oil Co. of La., 164 La. 334 , 113 So. 867 , 873: "`Either party is always permitted, in a suit between the parties to a contract, to correct any error in the instrument purporting to evidence the contract, so as to make it express truly and correctly the intention of the parties.' Levy v. Ward, 33 La.Ann. 1033 ; Vignie v. Brady & Charpaux, 35 La. Ann. 560 ; Armstrong v. Armstrong, 36 La.Ann. 549, 551 ; Dickson v. Dickson, 36 La.Ann. 870, 872 ; Bryan v. Wisner, 44 La.Ann. 832 , 11 So. 290 ; Gladdish v. Godchaux, 46 La.Ann. 1571 , 16 So. 451 ; Robinson v. Atkins, 105 La. 790, 793 , 30 So. 251 ; Gray v. Coco, 113 La. 33 , 36 So. 878 ; Penn v. Rodriguez, 115 La. 174 , 38 So. 955 ; Chaffe v. Minden Lumber Co., 118 La. 753 , 43 So. 397 ; Coleman v. Thibodaux, 119 La. 474 , 44 So. 269 ; Sims v. Jeter, 129 La. 262 , 55 So. 877 , Garrett v. Spratt, 131 La. 707 , 60 So. 199 ; Frantom v. Nelson, 142 La. 850 , 77 So. 767 ; Giovanovich v. Breda's Widow and Heirs, 149 La. 402 , 89 So. 251 ; Waller v. Colvin, 151 La. 765 , 92 So. 328 . "The following excerpt from Rodgers v. S. H. Bolinger Co., Ltd., 149 La. 545 , 89 So. 688, 690 , a”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.