Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 210 So. 2d 75 - Boucher v. Doyal

210 So. 2d 75 - Boucher v. Doyal’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
November 1991
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently November 1991

11 state decisions

501968197019801990decided

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 Hays v. Louisiana Wild Life and Fisheries Commission · Swain v. Kirkpatrick Lumber Co. · State Ex Rel. Anderson v. Walker · Dickson v. Richardson · Brewer Pharmacal Engineering Corp. v. Bellmor

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

  1. “(n)othing in our law sanctions the simultaneous payment to a discharged employee of his entire wages and full retirement benefits. Such a ruling would result in an obvious inequity which the courts cannot countenance; its effects upon the public treasury would be patently devastating.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"This act of the Legislature is a mandate to the effect that when the appellate courts find that an employee in the state or city civil service has been illegally discharged, as the Court of Appeal has found in the instant case, the employee shall be entitled to be paid all salaries and wages withheld during the period of illegal separation, against which amount shall be credited and set-off all wages and salaries earned by the employee in private employment in the period of separation. "Article 14, Section 15(0)(1), of the Constitution of this state provides that the decision of the Civil Service Commission shall be final on the facts. Under this provision an appeal from a decision of the Commission to the appellate court having jurisdiction lies only on questions of law. Whether a dismissed employee in the civil service had private employment during the period of separation and what was the amount of wages and salaries earned by him in private employment are questions of fact, of which this court under the above cited provision of the Constitution is without jurisdiction. The question of law before us, however, is whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to order that the employing authority might offset the amount of wages and salaries owed to Higgins during the period of illegal separation by any amount he might have earned in private employment during that period."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"* * * the pertinent statute expressly authorizes the appellate courts to offset wages and salaries against compensation due during the period of illegal dismissal in instances wherein the courts find improper dismissal and order reinstatement."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.