Rodriguez v. Claassen’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An appellate court reviews domestic protective orders for abuse of discretion. Alfonso v. Cooper , 14-0145, p. 13 (La. App. 4 Cir. 7/16/14), 146 So.3d 796 , 805. Moreover, the standard of review applicable to fact findings of the trial court has been clearly enunciated by our Supreme Court in Rabalais v. Nash , 06-0999, p. 4 (La. 3/9/07), 952 So.2d 653 , 657 : It is well-settled that a court of appeal may not set aside a trial court's or a jury's finding of fact in the absence of manifest error or unless it is clearly wrong .... To reverse a fact-finder's determination, the appellate court must find from the record that a reasonable factual basis does not exist for the finding of the trial court, and that the record establishes that the finding is clearly wrong. Mart v. Hill , 505 So.2d 1120 , 1127 (La. 1987). Where the [fact-finder's] findings are reasonable, in light of the record reviewed in its entirety, the court of appeal may not reverse. Even where the court of appeal is convinced that it would have weighed the evidence differently to reach a different result, reversal of the trial court is improper unless the trial court's ruling is manifestly erroneous, or clearly wrong.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 252 So. 3d 950 - S.L.B. v. C.E.B.

2. “[t]he court shall consider any and all past history of abuse, or threats thereof, in determining the existence of an immediate and present danger of abuse. There is no requirement that the abuse itself be recent, immediate, or present.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 252 So. 3d 950 - S.L.B. v. C.E.B.

3. “[u]pon good cause shown in an ex parte proceeding, the court may enter a temporary restraining order, without bond, as it deems necessary to protect from abuse ... any minor children ....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 252 So. 3d 950 - S.L.B. v. C.E.B.