Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 369 So. 2d 1161 - Tobin v. Jacobson

369 So. 2d 1161 - Tobin v. Jacobson’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
February 1995
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently February 1995

21 state decisions

160197919801990decided

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 Silver v. Silver · Pritchard Ex'X v. Norton · Angle v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co. · Gibbes v. Zimmerman · Angle v. Chicago St P M O Ry Co

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

  1. “"To constitute the requisite intent to result in civil liability, the defendant must have entertained a desire to bring about the result which followed and he should have believed that the result was substantially certain to follow. See Monk v. Veillon, 312 So.2d 377 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1975) ; Prosser, Law of Torts, (West 1971) pp. 31-32."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “in LSA-R.S. 23:1032 as amended by Act 147 of 1976 has either been overruled by the Supreme Court in Bazley, supra, or at any rate the meaning has been so broadened as to effectively do away with the earlier definition of the courts of appeal. In doing away with the earlier definition unless we include in the definition”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “... the alleged fault and negligence of the defendants cannot be equated to an intentional act for the reason that, under the pleadings herein, there is no basis for concluding that the defendants actively desired to achieve the fatal accident or that decedent's fall through the unbarricaded and unguarded hole was substantially certain to follow their alleged omission ...”
    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.