Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 554 SO2D 844 - Metropolis, Inc. v. Texada

Metropolis, Inc. v. Texada’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
November 1995
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Bennett v. Bennett · 248 So. 2d 88 - Mid-City Investment Co. v. Batiste · Mid-South Packaging, Inc. v. Hunter

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. “If the garnishee fails to answer within the delay provided by Article 2412, the judgment creditor may proceed by contradictory motion against the garnishee for the amount of the unpaid judgment, with interest and costs. The failure of the garnishee to answer prior to the filing of such a contradictory motion is prima facie proof that he has property of or is indebted to the judgment debtor to the extent of the judgment, interest, and costs. Judgment shall be rendered against the garnishee on trial of the motion unless he proves that he had no property of and was not indebted to the judgment debtor. If on the trial of such motion, the garnishee proves the amount of such property or indebtedness, the judgment against the garnishee shall be limited to the delivery of the property or payment of the indebtedness, as provided in Article 2415. Regardless of the decision on the contradictory motion, the court shall render judgment against the garnishee for the costs and a reasonable attorney's fee for the motion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The garnishee shall file his sworn answers to the interrogatories within fifteen days from the date of service.”
    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.