Anderson v. Nugent’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 1985
12 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 17 La. App. 605 - Green v. Frederick · Adler & Co. v. Moses · State ex rel. Illinois Central Railroad v. Judges of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · Delahoussaye v. D. M. Glazer & Co. · Richardson v. Turner
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It has been held that where it does not appear that the judgment was read in open court, it will be set aside, Richardson v. Turner, 52 La.Ann. 1613 , 28 So. 158 ; that an appeal taken before judgment was read and signed in open court was premature, Adler & Co. v. Moses, 5 La.App. 601 ; that judgment rendered in chambers without authorization of counsel or litigants was a nullity, Green v. Frederick, 17. La.App. 605, 136 So. 783 ; that judgment showing on its face that it was rendered in open court, but subsequently read and signed in chambers, without authorization of counsel or litigants and not in vacation, was null, Hammond Box Company, Inc., v. Carmello Musso & Co., La.App., 172 So. 790 ; and that a judgment must be read and signed in open court in the absence of agreement of the parties or their counsel, State ex rel. I. C. R. Co. v. Judges, 48 La.Ann. 905 , 19 So. 932 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“This argument has no merit. It ignores the fundamental distinction between the written reasons and the final judgment. LSA-C.C.P. Articles 1911 and 1918 provide: `Art. 1911. Final judgments read and signed in open court `Except as otherwise provided by law, all final judgments shall be read and signed by the judge in open court.' `Art. 1918. Form of final judgment `A final judgment shall be identified as such by appropriate language. When written reasons for the judgment are assigned, they shall be set out in an opinion separate from the judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“. . . we conclude that the reasons for judgment, notwithstanding the inclusion of a decree therein, cannot be considered as a proper and final judgment in the absence of some showing that the other requirements embodied in Article 543 of the Code of Practice, supra, have been met.”
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.