Ward v. Sylvester’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Arceneaux v. Domingue · Canter v. Koehring Company · 434 So. 2d 1067 - Kem Search, Inc. v. Sheffield · 446 So. 2d 1352 - Mix v. Mougeot · 454 So. 2d 177 - COMMERCIAL CREDIT CLAIMS SER., INC. v. Richardson
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Temple Drilling Company contends that plaintiffs claim is not a suit on open account and, therefore, is not subject to La. R.S. 9:2781. Temple argues that the treatment of Sylvester “... was a onetime transaction in which Doctor Ward’s office expected immediate payment.” This argument, however, is without merit upon a reading of paragraph C[ 4 ] of La. R.S. 9:2781 which provides: “For the purposes of this Section and Code of Civil Procedure Articles 1702 and 4916, ‘open account’ includes any account for which a part or all of the balance is past due, whether or not the account reflects one or more transactions and whether or not at the time of contracting the parties expected future transactions. ‘Open account’ shall include debts incurred for professional services, including, but not limited to, legal and medical services.””
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.