498 So. 2d 1081 - Moody v. Arabie’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 103 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 121 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably 597 So. 2d 439 - STATE, DOTD v. Williamson (1992), Rivet v. State, Dept. of Trans. and Dev. (1996)
13 federal appellate · 103 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 Saucier v. Hayes Dairy Products, Inc. · 421 So. 2d 216 - Leenerts Farms, Inc. v. Rogers · Whatley v. McMillan · 376 So. 2d 495 - Calk v. Highland Const. & Mfg. · 152 So. 2d 599 - Scott v. Hunt Oil Company
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 121 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]hen an employer pays compensation to a worker who has been injured by the wrongful act of a third person, the employer and the worker become co-owners of a property right consisting of a right to recover damages from a third person.”
23 later decisions quote this exact passage“[b]y deducting the employer's proportionate share of recovery costs from the compensation actually paid.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“A. (1) In the event that the employer or the employee or his dependent becomes party plaintiff in a suit against a third person, as provided in R.S. 23:1102, and damages are recovered, such damages shall be so apportioned in the judgment that the claim of the employer for the compensation actually paid shall take precedence over that of the injured employee or his dependent; and if the damages are not sufficient or are sufficient only to reimburse the employer for the compensation which he has actually paid, such damages shall be assessed solely in his favor; but if the damages are more than sufficient to so reimburse the employer, the excess shall be assessed in favor of the injured employee or his dependent, and upon payment thereof to the employee or his dependent, the liability of the employer for compensation shall cease for such part of the compensation due, computed at six percent per annum, and shall be satisfied by such payment. The employer's credit against its future compensation obligation shall be reduced by the amount of attorney fees and court costs paid by the employee in the third party suit. (2) No compromise with such third person by either the employer or the injured employee or his dependent shall be binding upon or affect the rights of the others unless assented to by him. B. The claim of the employer shall be satisfied in the manner described above from the first dollar of the judgment without regard to how the damages have been itemized or classified b”
5 later decisions 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.