Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 552 SO2D 688 - Nichols v. Stone Container Corp.

Nichols v. Stone Container Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
October 1998
most recently cited

13 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 341 So. 2d 332 - Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc. · 373 So. 2d 498 - Reck v. Stevens · Watson v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Ins. Co. · Landry v. State · 316 So. 2d 111 - Webster v. Rushing

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

  1. “We have no difficulty concluding that the plaintiff was not surprised by the issue and that the inclusion of the issue in the pretrial statement entered into evidence by stipulation controls the subsequent course of action of the case authorizing evidence on the issue of the plaintiffs negligence. Similarly, the plaintiff's corollary argument that the trial court abused its discretion by ordering the defendant to amend its pleadings to conform to the evidence is to no avail, as the pretrial order entered into the record by stipulation is controlling.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Thus, the initial inquiry must always be directed at whether the trier court's award for the particular injuries and their effects upon this particular injured person is, a clear abuse of the trier of fact's "much discretion," La.Civ.P. art. 1934(3) in the award of damages. It is only after articulated analysis of the facts discloses an abuse of discretion that the award may on appellate review, for articulated reason, be considered either excessive, or insufficient.”
    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.