LeBlanc v. Broussard’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently December 2007
6 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 Jackson v. Lajaunie · Edwards v. Trahan · 221 So. 2d 272 - Berry v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company · 236 So. 2d 920 - Pitre v. Pennsylvania Millers Mutual Insurance Co. · United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company v. Burris
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“ordinarily incident to non-business pursuits.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The business pursuit exclusion is intended to apply to all activities that are involved in furtherance of any business, employment, trade, occupation or profession. There are relatively few functions, such as walking, opening and closing doors, bending or standing that a person performs in a business that cannot be viewed in isolation as nonbusiness activity. One cannot perform normal work without engaging in such functions or activities, and to treat these activities in isolation as incidental to nonbusiness activity would render this exclusion meaningless. . . . . . When an activity, such as horseplay or a purely social amenity like preparing a cup of coffee, has lost its work related identification, it becomes an activity "incidental to non-business pursuits."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“with the general rule in workers' compensation cases that an accident befalling an employee while he is going to and from work does not occur in the course of his employment, contending that until he reached the field and began cutting grass he was not engaged in a business pursuit. In addressing the business pursuit exclusion, the court stated: The purpose of the”
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.