Ehrhardt v. Cummins’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 341 So. 2d 332 - Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc. · Bitoun v. Landry · 294 So. 2d 803 - Spillers v. MONTGOMERY WARD & COMPANY, INC. · Anderson v. Welding Testing Laboratory, Inc. · Fox v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The general rule is that a litigant may not recover an amount greater than that for which he prayed in his petition. Friedman Iron and Supply Co. v. J.B. Beaird Co., Inc., 222 La. 627 , 63 So.2d 144 (1952); Alumaglass Corp. v. Succession of Kendrick, 303 So.2d 911 (La.App. 1st Cir.1974); writs refused February 14, 1977. The only exception to this rule of which we are cognizant involves elements of special damages in situations when otherwise inadmissible evidence is admitted without objection and the pleadings are enlarged to that extent. LSA-C.C.P. Article 1154; Sterkx v. Gravity Drainage District No. 1 of Rapides Parish, 214 So.2d 552 , (La.App. 3rd Cir.1968), writs refused [ 252 La. 964 , 215 So.2d 130 ] November 15, 1968.””
2 later decisions 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.