LeBlanc v. Baxter’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
1 district · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · 549 So. 2d 840 - Rosell v. Esco · 617 So. 2d 880 - Stobart v. State Through DOTD · 628 So. 2d 1116 - State v. Foret · 507 So. 2d 825 - Virgil v. American Guar. & Liability Ins.
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“On appellate review, the court’s function is to determine whether the findings of the trier-of-fact were clearly wrong or manifestly erroneous. Himel v. State ex rel. Dept. of Transp. and Development, 04-274, p. 8 (La.App. 5th Cir.1/12/04), 887 So.2d 131 , 137-138, writ denied, 04-2802 (La.3/18/05), 896 So.2d 999 ; Rosell v. ESCO, 549 So.2d 840, 844 (La.1989). Where there is a conflict in the testimony, reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed upon review, even though the appellate court may feel that its own evaluations and inferences are as reasonable. Himel, 04-274 at p. 8, 887 So.2d at 137-138; Rosell, 549 So.2d at 844 . The issue to be resolved by the reviewing court is not whether the fact-finder was. right or wrong, but whether its conclusion was a reasonable one. Himel, 04-274 at p. 8, 887 So.2d at 138; Stobart v. State, Through DOTD, 617 So.2d 880, 882 (La.1993).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harris v. DeBrueys
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.