Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 117 LA 756 - Feitel v. Dreyfous

Feitel v. Dreyfous’s Empirical Analysis

1906

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
February 1914
most recently cited

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““A mere application, or offer to subscribe, carries with it no obligation on the part of the person to whom it is made to grant it. The promoters had not, in this case, in advance of the application, bound themselves to accept it, if and when made. There is no allegation or claim that they had done so. The slip, when returned to Breton and Dreyfous, was not, in itself and by itself, a subscription, but retained its character as an application.” Feitel v. Dreyfous, 117 La. 763 , 42 South. 259 .”
    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.