Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 59 SO2D 170 - Bernard Co. v. Cook

Bernard Co. v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
March 1986
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 1986

4 state decisions

201952196019701980decided

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 11 La. App. 147 - Provosty v. Clark

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

  1. ““To apply the Daney plan to that particular square in question, and to require that all boundaries in that square be relocated in accordance with that plan, would be disastrous. It is fair to presume that, if the boundary in question here is established in accordance with that plan, each affected property owner in the square would insist on the relocation of his boundary. If this were done, some of the boundaries would be placed either where actual improvements exist now, or so near to actual improvements as to require their removal. We mention this to show that each of the property owners must have bought his property and must have erected his improvements with reference to actual conditions, and not with reference to theoretical ones. ””
    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.