Leonard v. James Indus. Constructors’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
18 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 593 So. 2d 357 - Bruno v. Harbert Intern. Inc. · 660 So. 2d 7 - Resweber v. Haroil Const. Co. · 588 So. 2d 350 - Nelson v. Roadway Exp., Inc. · In Re Succession of Boyter · 836 So. 2d 14 - Fontenot v. Reddell Vidrine Water Dist.
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A. It shall be unlawful for any person, for the purpose of obtaining or defeating any benefit or payment under the provisions of this Chapter, either for himself or for any other person, to willfully make a false statement or representation. .... E. Any employee violating this Section shall, upon determination by workers' compensation judge, forfeit any right to compensation benefits under this Chapter.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“in the statute is quantitative, not temporal. As noted previously, statutory forfeiture of workers' compensation benefits is a harsh remedy and, as such, must be strictly construed. It is also noteworthy that the statute is quasi-penal, and such statutes are to be strictly construed. See Faught v. Ryder/P*I*E Nationwide, Inc., 543 So.2d 918, 921 (La.App. 1st Cir.1989), writ denied, 545 So.2d 1040 (La.1989). Further, retroactive application would not result in a”
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.