804 So. 2d 730 - MacK v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 640 So. 2d 237 - City of New Orleans v. Board of Com'rs · 388 So. 2d 707 - Ragas v. Argonaut Southwest Ins. Co. · 637 So. 2d 127 - Montalvo v. Sondes · Kuebler v. Martin · Rowe v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he two elements essential to establishing legal fraud are an intent to defraud or gain an unfair advantage and a resulting loss or damage.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A person who challenges a donation because of fraud, duress, or undue influence, must prove it by clear and convincing evidence. However, if, at the time the donation was made or the testament executed, a relationship of confidence existed between the donor and the wrongdoer and the wrongdoer was not then related to the donor by affinity, consanguinity or adoption, the person who challenges the donation need only prove the fraud, duress, or undue influence by a preponderance of the evidence.”
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.