Dileo v. Dileo’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 2007 · most notably Lee v. Jones (1953), Sun Oil Co. v. Tarver (1951)
2 federal appellate · 24 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 Tillery v. Fuller · J. B. Beaird Co. v. Burris Bros. · Long v. Chailan · Tyson v. Spearman · Dew v. Hammett
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Defendants contend that plaintiffs did not accept the succession of Santo Dileo within thirty years from his death in 1914 and therefore they must be considered to have renounced it. In support of the proposition, the case of Schultze v. Frost-Johnson Lumber Co., 131 La. 956 , 60 So. 629 is cited. "The point is not tenable. It is the firmly established jurisprudence that forced heirs do not lose by prescription their right of inheritance in failing to accept the succession within thirty years because, if they have not renounced it, they are presumed to have accepted it. Le mort saisit le vif. Articles 940, 941, Civil Code; Generes v. Bowie Lumber Co., 143 La. 811 , 79 So. 413 ; Bendernagel v. Foret, 145 La. 115 , 81 So. 869 ; Dew v. Hammett, 150 La. 1094 , 91 So. 523 and Tillery v. Fuller, 190 La. 586 , 182 So. 683 . The obiter dictum to the contrary in Schultze v. Frost-Johnson Lumber Co., supra, upon which defendants depend, was based on the ruling in Succession of Waters, 12 La.Ann. 97 , which was specifically overruled in Generes v. Bowie Lumber Co., supra."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“All informalities of legal procedure connected with or growing out of any sale at public auction or at private sale of real or personal property made by any sheriff of the Parishes of this State, licensed auctioneer, or other persons authorized by an order of the courts of this State, to sell at public auction or at private sale, shall be prescribed against by those claiming under such sale after the lapse of two years from the time of making said sale . . . . (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Winder v. George
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.