Smith v. Ducote’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on General Securities Co. v. Jumonville · 302 F. Supp. 62 - Meadow Brook National Bank v. Recile · 14 La. App. 110 - Green v. Johnson · 341 So. 2d 1109 - Karmgard v. SOUTHLAND MORTG. & TITLE CO. · Kaiser Union Building, Inc. v. Burroughs
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Since the statute specifically limits its application to obligations bearing interest from date and the note in this case bears interest at 10% from, maturity, we conclude that the interest rate violates Article 2924 and is therefore usurious. LSA-R.S. 9:3501 provides: Any contract for the payment of interest in excess of that authorized by law shall result in the forfeuture of the entire interest so contracted. Thus, the Smiths must forfeit the 10% interest after maturity.of the note which they contracted. However, they are entitled to legal interest on the unpaid principal from maturity of the debt. La.C.C. art. 1938. sfc ⅝ * * * jfc 398 So.2d at 193 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ganus v. Jopes
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.