Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 257 SO3D 260 - In re State

In re State’s Empirical Analysis

2018

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 549 So. 2d 840 - Rosell v. Esco · 617 So. 2d 880 - Stobart v. State Through DOTD · Canter v. Koehring Company · In re A.J.F. · 419 So. 2d 460 - Bagents v. Bagents

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

  1. “Louisiana courts have repeatedly expressed concern about child in need of custody judgments grounded in hearsay. The narrow time constraints imposed on the State in child in need of care proceedings does not relieve the State of its burden to offer admissible evidence.”
    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.