Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 483 SO2D 1192 - Salem v. Maise

Salem v. Maise’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
February 1994
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Salem v. Maise

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

  1. “LSA-C.C.P. Art. 1951 permits the trial court to amend a final judgment at any time to alter phraseology of the judgment, but not the substance. The amendment in question did not change the substance of the judgment, it simply altered the phraseology to supply missing words which were obviously intended but omitted in error. We conclude that the tidal court was authorized by Art. 1951 to make the change.”
    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.