Bays v. Bays’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 state decisions

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

1. “provide relief to victims of domestic violence by establishing `a civil remedy for domestic violence which will afford the victim immediate and easily accessible protection.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 958 So. 2d 740 - Branstetter v. Purohit · 63 So. 3d 1149 - Fontenot v. Newcomer

2. “In this case, the only party who filed a petition specifying allegations of abuse and requesting a protective order was plaintiff. Contrary to the court of appeal’s conclusion, the testimony by plaintiffs daughter and the defendant did not afford the plaintiff with reasonable notice that he could be subjected to a protective order when no petition had been filed or request made seeking a protective order against him. The only matter pending before the trial court was the plaintiffs petition for a protective order sought by plaintiff against the defendant. Plaintiff simply was not given reasonable notice of the possibility that he might be subjected to a protective order. | «Additionally, we disagree with the court of appeal’s conclusion that the plaintiff had an opportunity to be heard at the July 2, 1999 hearing because he had an opportunity to cross-examine his daughter concerning her allegations that he physically abused her. Procedural due process requires that a person be given a meaningful opportunity to be heard. At the hearing, plaintiff decided to limit the cross-examination of his daughter, so as not to traumatize her. He did not think an extensive cross-examination was necessary because he did not know that his actions were at issue. Plaintiff contended had he known that there was a possibility of a protective order being issued against him based on his daughter’s testimony, he would have been prepared to cross-examine her and put on a defense. Thus, plaintiff did ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rodriguez v. Claassen

3. “A. A petition filed under the provisions of this Part shall contain the following: (1) The name of each petitioner and each person on whose behalf the petition is filed, and the name, address, and parish of residence of each individual alleged to have committed abuse, if known; if the petition is being filed on behalf of a child or person alleged to be incompetent, the relationship between that person and the petitioner. (2) The facts and circumstances concerning the alleged abuse. (3) The relationship between each petitioner and each individual alleged to have committed abuse. (4)A request for one or more protective orders.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rodriguez v. Claassen