451 So. 2d 621 - Pelt v. Guardsmark, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2008
8 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 Arceneaux v. Domingue · Canter v. Koehring Company · Wallace v. Remington Rand, Inc. · 363 So. 2d 419 - Bolden v. Georgia Cas. & Sur. Co. · Wiberg v. Simmons
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that the appellate court should not disturb the finding of the trial court unless it is clearly wrong. This court should determine whether the district court judgment is clearly wrong considering all the evidence, Canter v. Koehring Company, 283 So.2d 716 (La.1973) and it's [sic] progeny.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a party within a time limitation must insure actual delivery, since it is the time when the clerk receives actual delivery of the pleading which determines whether that pleading has been timely filed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“all pleadings or documents to be filed in an action or proceeding instituted or pending in a court ... shall be delievered to the clerk of the court for such purpose.”
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.