Lees v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Trinity Universal Insurance Co. v. Cowan (1997), 390 So. 2d 196 - Cangelosi v. SCHWEGMANN BROS., ETC. (1980)
2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
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 American Home Assurance Company v. Czarniecki · Madison v. Bolton · Eusant v. Unity Industrial Life Ins., Etc., Ass'n · 307 So. 2d 287 - Robinson v. Goudchaux's · 313 So. 2d 812 - Johnson v. Pearce
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"An insurer's duty to defend suits brought against its insured is determined by the allegations of the plaintiff's petition, with the insurer being obligated to provide a defense unless the petition unambiguously excludes coverage. American Home Assurance Company v. Czarniceki, 255 La. 251 , 230 So.2d 253 (1969); Ada Resources, Inc., et al. v. Don Chamblin & Assoc., Inc., et al., 361 So.2d 1339 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1978)."”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) The commencement or continuance of an original criminal or civil judicial proceeding. (2) Its legal causation by the present defendant in the original proceeding. (3) Its bona fide termination in favor of the present plaintiff. (4) The absence of probable cause for such proceeding. (5) The presence of malice therein. (6) Damage conforming to legal standards resulting to plaintiff.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“the policy behind this requirement is apparent; a party bringing a suit should not be made to defend his right to bring such until it is fully determined at trial that the original action was erroneously brought. The possible “chilling effect” on a citizen’s constitutional right to seek redress in the courts is an important consideration.”
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.