591 So. 2d 1184 - Carter v. BRMAP’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably Smith v. OUR LADY OF LAKE HOSP. (1994), Sanders v. Ashland Oil, Inc. (1997)
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 37 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.
Relationships
Relies on Medina-Munoz v. Rj Reynolds Tobacco Company · 550 So. 2d 577 - Penalber v. Blount · 496 So. 2d 270 - Scott v. Hosp. Serv. Dist. No. 1 · National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh Pennsylvania v. Argonaut Insurance Company · Dixie Campers, Inc. v. Vesely 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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... is rarely appropriate for a determination based on subjective facts such as intent, motive, malice, knowledge or good faith.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“Contracts have the effect of law on the parties thereto and must be performed in good faith. La. [Civ.Code] art.1983. Interpretation of a contract is the determination of the common intent of the parties. La. [Civ.Code] art.2045. When the words of a contract are clear and explicit and lead to no absurd consequences, no further interpretation may be made in search of the intent of the parties. La. [Civ.Code] art.2046. Conversely, when the terms of a contract are susceptible to more than one interpretation, it is ambiguous and parol evidence may be used to show the true intent of the parties and various rules of interpretation become applicable. La. [Civ.Code] arts. 2045 et seq.; Dixie Campers, Inc. v. Vesely Company, 398 So.2d 1087 (La.1981). Words susceptible of different meanings must be interpreted as having the meaning that best conforms to the object of the contract. La. [Civ.Code] art. 2048. A provision susceptible of different meanings must be interpreted with a meaning that renders it effective and not with one that renders it ineffective. La. [Civ.Code] art. 2049....”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“When a motion for a summary judgment has been filed and supported by evidence, the adverse party may no longer rely on the mere allegations or denials of his pleading, but through affidavits or otherwise must set forth evidence demonstrating there is a genuine issue for trial.”
2 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.