Flowers v. Pugh’s Empirical Analysis
1951
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 1978
10 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.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * Hence, the only question presented is the legal effect of the filing of the suit in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans. “In considering that question, the following provisions of law are pertinent: “Civil Code, Article 3518, provides: ‘A legal interruption takes place, when the possessor has been cited to appear before a court of justice, on account either of the ownership or of the possession; and the prescription is interrupted by such demand, whether the suit has been brought before a court of competent jurisdiction or not.’ “Act No. 39 of 1932, now LSA-Revised Statutes Title 9:5801: ‘The filing of a suit in a court of competent jurisdiction shall interrupt all prescriptions affecting the cause of action therein sued upon, against all defendants, including minors and interdicts.’ “Code of Practice Articles 86 and 87 provide: “Article 87: ‘In order to ascertain whether a judge be competent or not, three points must be taken into consideration : “ T. The object or the amount in dispute. “ ‘2. The person of the defendant. “ ‘3. The place where the action is to be brought.’ “Article 86: ‘In matters of jurisdiction, the right given to a judge to take cognizance of certain causes against certain persons within his jurisdiction, is termed competency.’ “It may appear at first glance that the provisions of Civil Code, Article 3518 and Act No. 39 of 1932 are in conflict and that Act No. 39 of 1932 therefore tacitly repeals Article 3518 but a study of the two ”
4 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.