961 So. 2d 404 - Fernandez v. Hebert’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
22 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 907 So. 2d 37 - Suire v. Lafayette City-Parish Government · Pendley v. City of Plaquemine · Robin v. Concerned Citizens, St. Bernard, Inc. · Succession of Crawford · 867 So. 2d 723 - Motorola, Inc. v. Associated Indem. Corp.
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Rutledge [v. Hibernia Corp., 00-0674 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1/16/02) , 808 So.2d 765 ], the fourth circuit examined whether a petition for damages for alleged acts of negligence and breach of contract stated a cause of action. There, Rutledge had averred that as caretaker of the decedent, she had been given an unlimited power of attorney authorizing her to perform all acts for the decedent that she would be legally able to perform for herself. Rutledge subsequently assisted the decedent in | ^making two donations to family members. While at the bank acquiring funds for one of the donations, the decedent instructed Rutledge to cash a certificate of deposit and expressed her intent to donate the cashed funds to Rutledge. It was alleged that Rutledge properly completed the paperwork; a bank employee informed her that the paperwork would be sent to a New Orleans office for processing; and the bank employees were aware that Rutledge had a power of attorney from the decedent. After the decedent died, Rutledge returned to the bank to inquire about the delay in delivery of the certificate of deposit. She was advised an error had occurred and that the bank had failed to process the paperwork properly. Thus, the certificate of deposit was still in the decedent’s name upon her death and believed to have been paid or delivered to the decedent’s succession. Noting that under the commercial laws, an instrument is transferred by delivery to someone other than its issuer for the purpose of givin”
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.