Jordan v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * * When an appellate court renders a final judgment on the merits of a case, disposing of all of the issues tendered, and remands the case to the trial court for the purpose merely of having a certain calculation made, or of having certain specified facts ascertained, and with instructions to the trial court to render judgment according to the opinion rendered by the appellate court, the merits of the case are not subject to review or reconsideration by means of another appeal. Stark v. Burke, Watt & Co., 9 La.Ann. 344 ; Lewis v. Baker, 128 La. 92 , 54 So. 482 ; Banahan v. Hughes, 158 La. 648 , 104 So. 486 ; Keegan v. Board of Commissioners, 154 La. 639 , 98 So. 50 ; In re New Orleans Public Belt Railroad, 159 La. 431 , 105 So. 421 ; Hoey v. New Orleans Great Northern Railroad Co., 164 La. 112 , 113 So. 785 ; Martinez v. Orleans Parish School Board, 173 La. 114 , 136 So. 287 ; City of Shreveport v. Kansas City S. & G. R. Co., 184 La. 473 , 166 So. 471 ; City of Shreveport v. Kansas City S. & G. Ry. Co., 193 La. 277 , 190 So. 404, 405 ; In re Potts & Co., 166 U.S. 263 , 17 S.Ct. 520 , 41 L.Ed. 994 ; Peavy-Byrnes Lumber Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 5 Cir., 86 F.2d 234 ; City of Orlando v. Murphy, 5 Cir., 94 F.2d 426 .””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Stassi v. Gureasko · 280 So. 2d 845 - Hilliard v. Shuff