Woodell v. Roberts’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
February 1974
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 113 So. 2d 95 - Loeblich v. Garnier · Grant Timber & Manufacturing Co. v. Gray · Churchill Farms, Inc. v. Gaudet · Esmele v. Violet Trapping Co. · Grant Timber & Mfg. Co. v. Gray
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.
““Plaintiffs, Herbert Reeves Woodell, Sr. and Jr., allegedly in possession as owners since the year 1914 of. a tract of land situated in Caddo Parish, Louisiana, instituted a possessory action against. Virl Roberts, who allegedly disturbed their possession within the year preceding the filing of this action. The disturbance is alleged to have consisted of an action instituted by Roberts to evict them from the property. Plaintiffs prayed for a temporary restraining order and, after due proceedings, a preliminary injunction restraining defendant from evicting them during the pendency of the suit. The district judge refused to sign an order granting the temporary restraining order or setting the rule for a preliminary injunction for hearing. “In an application to this court for remedial writs, applicants, the Woodells, show that a writ of possession issued based upon a judgment rendered in the eviction, a summary proceeding, and that, unless the writs applied for were granted, they would forthwith and summarily be dispossessed and evicted from the property.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Roberts v. Woodell““Let alternative writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus issue herein as prayed for, directed to the Honorable James R. Alexander, Judge, First Judicial District Court, in and for the Parish of Caddo, State of Louisiana, ordering that he show cause on or before Thursday, June 28th, 1973, at 9:30 a. m., why the relief prayed for should not be granted. It is further ordered that a hearing be had on the same day and hour as above shown. “IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all proceedings in this cause be stayed and suspended, and further action is hereby prohibited pending judgment of this Court perpetuating or recalling the writs above described. “IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all proceedings in the cause of VIRL ROBERTS V. HERBERT REEVES WOODELL, ET AL, No. 214,220 on the docket of the First Judicial District Court, Parish of Caddo, State of Louisiana, be and they are hereby stayed and prohibited pending judgment of this Court perpetuating or recalling the writs above described.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Roberts v. Woodell
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.