Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 669 SO2D 682 - Smith v. Boothe

Smith v. Boothe’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently February 2015

14 state decisions

80199620002010decided

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

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 108

Relies on 595 So. 2d 624 - Lima v. Schmidt · Braud v. New England Ins. Co. · 588 So. 2d 792 - Haltom v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. · Phillip v. Pender · Norwood v. Fish

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

  1. “Encountering, by early November 1991, the indicated elements of a malpractice action, the Smiths should have taken practical steps to investigate further and prosecute any such claims against defendants, prior to the running of the prescriptive period. Cf. Teague [ v. Scott, 597 So.2d 1060 (La.App. 2 Cir.1992), writ denied, 604 So.2d 972 (La.1992)]. This is true despite appellants' contention that, as non-lawyers, they could not know their attorney had committed a negligent or illegal act. Under such circumstances, a layman may not escape commencement of prescription by asserting that his ability to comprehend and evaluate the facts is limited. Teague [, 597 So.2d 1060 ].”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[m]oreover, it is not necessary that the client sustain all, or even the greater part, of the damages occasioned by his attorney's fault before a cause of action for malpractice arises. Instead, any appreciable and actual harm flowing from the lawyer's negligent conduct establishes justiciability.”
    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.