Nationwide Acceptance Co. v. Alexis’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently October 2018
7 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 192 So. 2d 884 - Guedry Finance Company v. Breland · Richardson v. Trustees' Loan & Guaranty Co. · White Hall Agr. Co. v. Police Jury · Caldwell v. Glenn · Wall v. Wilson
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"A final judgment shall be annulled if it is rendered: (2) Against a defendant who has not been served with process as required by law and has not entered a general appearance, or against whom a valid judgment by default has not been taken;"”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"... it is fundamental that no valid judgment can be rendered in any case unless the defendant has been informed of the suit against him by citation in strict compliance with the law. L.S.A.-C.C.P. art. 2002; Richardson v. Trustees' Loan & Guaranty Co., 15 La.App. 645 , 132 So. 387 (1931). Knowledge of the existence of an action on the part of the defendant, no matter how clearly brought home to him, cannot supply the want of a citation [citations omitted]." Nationwide Acceptance Company v. Alexis, 201 So.2d 21, 23 , (La.App. 4th Cir.1967).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“a child under 6 years of age could hardly be considered a person of suitable age and discretion for such an important procedural aspect as this.... Surely it was not the intention of the redactors, by the wording of LSA-C.C.P. Art. 1234, to make possible the service of process upon a 5-year-old child. Therefore, the defendants were not served with process as required by law.”
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.