Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 442 SO2D 876 - Mitchell v. South Central Bell

Mitchell v. South Central Bell’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
November 1987
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Canter v. Koehring Company · Hill v. Lundin & Associates, Inc. · 392 So. 2d 786 - Lear v. United States Fire Ins. Co. · United States v. M/V BIG SAM

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"Regarding the causal relationship required between the harm to the plaintiff and the defendant's alleged negligent conduct, if the plaintiff can show that she probably would not have suffered the injury complained of but for the defendant's conduct, she has carried her burden of proof relative to cause in fact. Lear v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., 392 So.2d 786 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1980)."”
    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.