Waguespack v. Richard’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The respondent judge, relying on the case of Langlois v. Lancaster, 217 La. 995 , 47 So.2d 795 , suggests that the question is now moot in view of the requirement (as recited in the plaintiff’s application for writs) that the ballots must be in the hands of the printer by a date which is now past, and the further provisions of LSA-R.S. 18:362 to the effect that if any contest filed in the district court is not finally decided in time to print the name of the party’s nominee on the ballot, the name of the contestee in the suit shall be certified and printed as the party nominee. “This position is unavailable to the respondent. As judge, his duty was to hear and try the case, which was instituted timely, and whether or not the above provision becomes applicable in view of the passage of time is not an issue before him nor a matter that concerns him.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Downs v. Pharis