Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 546 SO2D 895 - Dwyer v. Smith

Dwyer v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
December 2000
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 418 So. 2d 531 - South Central Bell Telephone Co. v. Texaco, Inc. · 529 So. 2d 374 - Butler v. Baber · 297 So. 2d 185 - Montgomery v. Breaux · 337 So. 2d 313 - Nuckolls v. Louisiana State Highway Department · Summerville v. Missouri Pacific R. Co.

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

  1. “The one-year prescriptive period set forth in LSA-C.C. art. 3493 is applicable when the damages alleged under LSA-C.C. art. 667 are caused to immovable property. Ordinarily the prescriptive period commences to run from the day the owner of the immovable acquired, or should have acquired knowledge of the damage. However, "[w]here the cause of the injury is a continuous one giving rise to successive damages, prescription dates from cessation of the wrongful conduct causing the damage." South Central Bell Telephone Company v. Texaco, Inc., 418 So.2d 531, 533 (La. 1982). Since the wrongful acts of the defendants are alleged to be continuing and recurring, the prescriptive period has not yet begun to run.”
    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.