Lowe v. Rivers’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2013
21 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 434 So. 2d 1083 - Ray v. Alexandria Mall · 359 So. 2d 154 - Welch v. Crown Zellerbach Corp. · 390 So. 2d 1272 - Baker v. Payne & Keller of La., Inc. · 296 So. 2d 271 - Majesty v. Comet-Mercury-Ford Co. of Lorain, Mich. · O'BRIEN v. Delta Gas, 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The amended claim must arise out of the same transaction or occurrence set forth in the original pleading; (2) The purported substitute defendant must have received notice of the institution of the action such that he will not be prejudiced in maintaining a defense on the merits; (3) The purported substitute defendant must know or should have known that but for a mistake concerning the identity of the proper party defendant, the action would have been brought against him; (4) The purported substitute defendant must not be a wholly new or unrelated defendant, since this would be tantamount to assertion of a new cause of action which would have otherwise prescribed.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“When the action or defense asserted in the amended petition or answer arises out of the conduct, transaction, or occurrence set forth or attempted to be set forth in the original pleading, the amendment relates back to the date of filing the original pleading.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“March 6, 1981 Appellant, Harvey Lowe, Jr., was allegedly injured in a work-related accident. Lowe was employed at this time by Joe Ollie Rivers, Jr., who was in the business of cutting and hauling pulpwood. January 25, 1982 Lowe sued Joe Ollie Rivers, Jr. and an unknown worker’s compensation insurer. March 22, 1982 Lowe amended his original petition in an attempt to add Union Wood Company as a defendant. In response, Union Wood Company filed an exception of prescription. October 15, 1982 Lowe amended his petition a second time in an attempt to add International Paper Company and Georgia Casualty as defendants. In response, International Paper filed an exception of prescription. December 20, 1982 The trial court signed a judgment which sustained Union Wood’s exception of prescription. Union Wood was dismissed from the case, and no appeal was taken by Lowe. March 28, 1983 Union Wood filed an exception of res judicata in response to the amended petition of October 15. . This exception was later upheld, and Union Wood was dismissed from the suit a second time. August 81, 1983 Lowe filed a pleading entitled “Petition to Annul Judgment and for Damage”. This petition named Union Wood Company, Max Gilmore, and Edna Gilmore as defendants, but failed to state or pray for damages. The petition sought to annul the judgment of December 20,1982 which had dismissed Union Wood. January 16, 1984 This court upheld the trial court’s sustaining of an exception of res judicata filed by Union Wood”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lowe v. Rivers
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.