Jackson v. Hannie’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently November 1991
21 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 Ducote v. Ducote · Coltraro v. Lotuso · Dupre v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. · 216 So. 2d 158 - Levingston Supply Co. v. AMERICAN EMPLOYERS'INS. CO. · Bentley v. Barrett
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The district courts shall prescribe the procedure for assigning cases for trial, by rules which shall: “(1) Require adequate notice of trial to all parties, and “(2) Prescribe the order of preference in accordance with law. “These rules shall not allow the assignment of ordinary proceedings for trial except after answer filed." (Emphasis supplied)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Upon consideration of the authorities relied upon in our original opinion herein and in the Dupre dissent, we now expressly overrule this latter decision. The bond filed for the suspensive appeal was obviously more than sufficient to secure the payment of costs, the requirement of a devolutive appeal bond. LSA-C.C.P. Article 2124. The appeal should not be dismissed for any insufficiency or deficiency unless the opponent has first been afforded an opportunity to furnish a valid bond. LSA-C.C.P. Article 5025.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Borfield v. Hippler““Our jurisprudence under LSA-C.C.P. Article 2123 is established that where a suspensive appeal is dismissed as not timely perfected, it will be considered by the court as a devolutive appeal. This is true notwithstanding the fact that the motion and order failed to include any mention of a devolutive appeal. See Levingston Supply Company, Inc. v. American Employers Insurance Company, La.App., 216 So.2d 158 (1st Cir.1958) and the authorities cited therein.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.