Acosta v. Cole’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Art. 2001. Obligations personal to obligee. The obligation shall be presumed to be personal as to the obligee, in a contract to do or to give, when that which was to be done or given, was exclusively for the personal gratification of the obligee, and could produce no benefit to his heirs.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Victorian v. Victorian · 457 So. 2d 691 - Averette v. Jordan

2. “if that, which was to be done, was not solely and exclusively for the use or gratification of the obligee, the obligation, although personal as to the obligor, will be heritable against the heirs of the obligee for the equivalent to be paid or given for that which was to be done.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Victorian v. Victorian · 457 So. 2d 691 - Averette v. Jordan

3. “The present case is complicated by the fact that Clargia, the obligor, did not die until after partial performance by him. Clargia, the obligor, took care of Curley, the obligee, for approximately six years before Clargia died. The above quoted Articles of the Civil Code [Articles 2002-2003] do not expressly answer the question of the rights and obligations of the heirs of the obligor who dies after partial performance of an obligation personal as to the obligor. However, Alain A. Levasseur, Precis in Conventional Obligations, A Civil Code Analysis, at page 79, gives the following helpful discussion in stating general principles applicable in case of fortuitous nonperformance: (a) Principle: "Res perit debitori". In the situation where one obligation can no longer be performed because of fortuitous event, the other obligation will also become extinct. The release of one party leads to the release of the other. This solution can be explained by the theory of cause. The risks are, therefore, in a sense, for the party whose performance has become impossible because of fortuitous event. Example: the patron of a theater is entitled to the reimbursement of his ticket if the theater cannot put on the show as a result of the death of an actor. This principle (not expressly stated in the code) can be induced from a series of code articles: example; LCC 2697; 2759; 2760; 2879. This principle is applicable to all synallagmatic contracts whether they create obligations to do or not to do”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 457 So. 2d 691 - Averette v. Jordan