308 So. 2d 270 - Turner v. Bucher’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 54 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"We conclude that although a child of tender years may be incapable of committing a legal delict because of his lack of capacity to discern the consequences of his act, nevertheless, if the act of a child would be delictual except for this disability, the parent with whom he resides is legally at fault and, therefore, liable for the damage occasioned by the child's act. This legal fault is determined without regard to whether the parent could or could not have prevented the act of the child, i. e., without regard to the parent's negligence. It is legally imposed strict liability. This liability may be escaped when a parent shows the harm was caused by the fault of the victim, by the fault of a third person, or by a fortuitous event. Having made the threshold determination that a father is responsible for the delicts of his minor child whether or not the child is of sufficient age to be capable of discerning the consequences of his acts, we need not determine whether this particular child, Gregory Bucher, was possessed of the requisite age and capacity to know the consequences of his act. Such an inquiry would be irrelevant and immaterial in answering the issue before us. The fact that the conduct was tortious when measured by normal standards is enough to render the father liable therefor."”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Arceneaux v. Domingue · Gremillion v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co.

2. “The father, or after his decease, the mother, are responsible for the damage occasioned by their minor or unemancipated children, residing with them, or placed by them under the care of other persons, reserving to them recourse against those persons.”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Flannigan v. Valliant · Johnson v. Escude

3. “would have been sufficiently negligent, imprudent and careless to constitute civil negligence if the child had been a person of discernment.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 901 So. 2d 1197 - Lafayette Parish School Bd. v. Cormier · 793 So. 2d 495 - Jones v. Cobb