Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 326 So. 2d 481 - Breaux v. State

326 So. 2d 481 - Breaux v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
5
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently May 2018

14 state decisions

8019761980199020002010decided

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 Canter v. Koehring Company · Jordan v. Travelers Insurance Company · Hickman Ex Rel. Iles v. Southern Pacific Transport Co. · Snodgrass v. Centanni · Dane v. Canal Insurance Company

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

  1. “"... A penal institution is not an insurer of an inmate against attacks by other inmates. The standard is that of reasonable or ordinary care. The majority rule is that in order to hold the penal authorities liable for an injury inflicted upon an inmate by another inmate, the authorities must know or have reason to anticipate that harm will ensue and fail to use reasonable care in preventing the harm." 282 So.2d 483 at 486 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"We find that, even under this standard enunciated by Parker , the state is here liable for its employee's failure to use reasonable care in preventing harm after they had reasonable cause to anticipate it. It is therefore unnecessary for us to here decide whether, additionally, the broader rule adopted by the majority of the court of appeal should apply—namely, that the state may be liable as well for its negligent failure to provide a sufficient number of guards and sufficient security arrangements and equipment to assure reasonable safety to the inmates under its total custody (who was thus deprived of lawful means to protect their own safety)."”
    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.