Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 501 SO2D 269 - Sparacello v. Andrews

Sparacello v. Andrews’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
1
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably 634 So. 2d 466 - Belle Pass Terminal, Inc. v. Jolin, Inc. (1994), Nolan v. Boeing Company General Electric Company Cfm (1990)

1 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

2101986199020002010decided

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 · Dixie Drive It Yourself System New Orleans Co. v. American Beverage Co. · 455 So. 2d 1364 - Harris v. Pizza Hut of Louisiana, Inc. · Laird v. Travelers Insurance 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[a] continuance may be granted in any case if there is good ground therefor.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In a jury trial, the judge is not required to give the precise instructions submitted by either party, but must give instructions which properly reflect the law applicable in light of the facts of the particular case. Beck v. Lovell, 361 So.2d 245 (La.App. 1st Cir.1978), writ denied, 362 So.2d 802 (La.1978). Adequate instructions are those instructions which fairly and reasonably point up the issues presented by the pleadings and evidence and which provide correct principles of law for the jury's application thereto. Davidson v. Peden, 413 So.2d 568 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982). The judge has a duty to charge the jury as to the law applicable in a case and the correlative right and responsibility to require that the jury get only the correct law. It is the judge's responsibility to reduce the possibility of confusing the jury, and he may exercise the right to decide what law is applicable to prevent counsel from arguing law which the trial judge deems inappropriate. Arnouville v. Joiner Enterprises, Inc., 423 So.2d 1246 (La.App. 5th Cir.1982), writ denied, 430 So.2d 76 (La.1983).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[t]he reason for this well-settled principle of review is based not only upon the trial court's better capacity to evaluate live witnesses (as compared to the appellate court's access only to a cold record), but also upon the proper allocation of trial and appellate functions between respective courts.”
    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.