West v. Gajdzik’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently April 2014
15 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 Cartwright v. Chrysler Corporation · 375 So. 2d 1319 - Corsey v. State, Through Dept. of Corrections · 392 So. 2d 398 - Smith v. Cajun Insulation, Inc. · Hyman v. Hibernia Bank & Trust Co. · Cartwright v. Chrysler Corp.
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The doctrine of contra non valentem has been applied to cases wherein defendant has concealed the fact of the offense or has committed acts (including concealment, fraud, misrepresentation, or other ill practices) which tend to hinder, impede, or prevent the plaintiff from asserting his cause of action, as long as plaintiff’s delay in bringing suit is not wilful or the result of his own negligence. Nathan v. Carter, 372 So.2d 560 (La.1979); Cartwright v. Chrysler Cor poration, supra [ 255 La. 597 , 232 So.2d 285 (1970)]; Hyman v. Hibernia Bank & Trust Co., 139 La. 411 , 71 So. 598 (1916); Dufrene v. Tracy, 232 La. 386 , 94 So.2d 297 (1957); Ayres v. New York Life Ins. Co., 219 La. 945 , 54 So.2d 409 (1951). The equitable nature of the circumstances in each individual case has determined the applicability of the doctrine. Nathan v. Carter, supra; Dagen-hart v. Robertson Truck Lines, Inc., 230 So.2d 916 (La.App. 1 Cir.1970).””
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.