Allstate Ins. Co. v. Theriot’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 64 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Giroir v. South Louisiana Medical Center, Division of Hospitals (1985), Nichols v. Lighthouse Restaurant, Inc. (1998)
6 federal appellate · 64 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 Marquette Casualty Company v. Brown · National Surety Corp. v. Standard Accident Ins. Co. · Hope v. Madison · Callender v. Marks · Nini v. Sanford Brothers, Inc.
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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is true that, if (as in this case) the subsequent claimant is a different person than the original plaintiff, then to interrupt prescription the first suit must not only be based upon the same factual occurrence as is the subsequent claim by amended petition or intervention; the subsequent claimant must also be closely connected in relationship and identity of interest with the original plaintiff.”
18 later decisions quote this exact passage“When the defendant knows or should know, prior to the expiration of the prescriptive period, that legal demands are made upon him from the occurrence described in the petition filed, prescription is interrupted.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Under La.R.S. 23:1101 as interpreted by National Surety Corporation v. Standard Accident Ins. Co., 247 La. 905 , 175 So.2d 263 (1965), Allstate's timely suit against Theriot fully apprised him that judicial claim was being made to enforce his liability for personal injuries caused to Moore by the accident in question. He thus received notice of the possibility that Moore himself might intervene in this suit. Prescription as to any claim for Moore's personal injuries, whether by Moore himself or by the insurer, was thus interrupted by the insurer's timely-filed initial suit.”
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.