Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 260 La. 384 - Hilliard v. Shuff

Hilliard v. Shuff’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
4
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district · 47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 310 So. 2d 93 - Hero Lands Company v. Texaco, Inc. (1975), 284 So. 2d 905 - Lombard v. Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans (1973)

4 federal appellate · 1 district · 47 state decisions

24019721980199020002010decided

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 Reymond v. State Ex Rel. Department of Highways · Robichaux v. Huppenbauer · Borgnemouth Realty Co. v. Gulf Soap Corporation

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

  1. ““Art. 667. Although a proprietor may-do with his estate whatever he pleases, still he can not make any work on it, which may deprive his neighbor of the liberty of enjoying his own, or which may be the cause of any damage to him. “Art. 668. Although one be not at liberty to make any work by which his neighbor’s buildings may be damaged, yet every one has the liberty of doing on his own ground whatsoever he pleases, although it should occasion some inconvenience to his neighbor. “Thus he who is not subject to any servitude originating from a particular agreement in that respect, may raise his house as high as he pleases, although by such elevation he should darken the lights of his neighbors’s [neighbor’s] house, because this act occasions only an inconvenience, but not a real damage. “Art. 669. If the works or materials for any manufactory or other operation, cause an inconvenience to those in the same or in the neighboring houses, by diffusing smoke or nauseous smell, and there be no servitude established by which they are regulated, their sufference must be determined by the rules of the police, or the customs of the place.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"If the works or materials for any manufactory or other operation, cause an inconvenience to those in the same or in the neighboring houses, by diffusing smoke or nauseous smell, and there be no servitude established by which they are regulated, their sufferance must be determined by the rules of the police, or the customs of the place."”
    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.