Ducote v. Stark’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * * Unquestionably, this would be a correct assumption were it not for the fact that the determination of the true nature of the instrument is an essential element in the application, vel non, of the prohibition of law contained in the above quoted codal article. As pointed out by our distinguished brother of the district court, it would be impossible to establish the actual nature of a conveyance as being a reprobated and prohibited donation omnium bonorum unless evidence extraneous to the recitals of the formal act should be admissible. The district judge relied upon the holdings in Cahow v. Hughes, La.App., 169 So. 801 and La.App., 173 So. 471, 473 ; Jeansonne v. Jeansonne, 187 La. 939 , 175 So. 626 ; and Kelly v. Kelly, 131 La. 1024 , 60 So. 671, 672 . * * * ” (Ducote v. Stark, 87 So.2d 770, 773 )”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williams v. Collier

2. ““The donation inter vivos shall in no case divest the donor of all his property; he must reserve to himself enough for subsistence; if he does not do it, the donation is null for the whole.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Magee v. Stacey