113 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2026 7 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Louisiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. State Through Dept. HHRgreen2 sentences2014Pfiffner, 643 So.2d at 1230 , Louisiana Revised Statute 9:2794A(3) requires the plaintiff to prove that as a “proximate result” of the defendant’s failure to exercise the required degree of care, “the plaintiff suffered injuries that would not otherwise have been incurred.” Smith, 523 So.2d at 820 . 2005Allello v. Smith, 94-103, (La. 5th Cir.7/26/94), 641 So.2d 664 , citing Smith v. State through Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 523 So.2d 815, 819 (La.1988). | 4 | 5 |
Martin v. East Jefferson General Hosp.green2 sentences2010Likewise, in Martin v. East Jefferson General Hospital, 582 So.2d 1272, 1276-1277 (La. 1991), we stated that deciding whether the plaintiff established by a preponderance of the evidence that the doctor's actions fell below the ordinary standard of care expected of physicians in his medical specialty and whether a causal relationship existed between the alleged breach of that standard and the injury sustained are determinations of fact which should not be reversed on appeal absent manifest error. 2010Likewise, in Martin v. East Jefferson General Hospital, 582 So.2d 1272, 1276-1277 (La.1991), we stated that deciding whether the plaintiff established by a preponderance of the evidence that the doctor’s actions fell below the ordinary standard of care expected of physicians in his medical specialty and whether a causal relationship existed between the alleged breach of that standard and the injury sustained are determinations of fact which should not be reversed on appeal absent manifest error. | 4 | 4 |
Pfiffner v. Correagreen2 sentences2023R.S. 9:2794, this Court has held that a medical malpractice plaintiff must establish the applicable standard of care and a breach of that standard of care, as well as “a causal connection between the physician’s alleged negligence and the plaintiff’s injuries resulting therefrom.” McCarter, 2009-1508, p. 2, 44 So.3d at 346 (quoting Pfiffner, 1994-0992, 0963, 0992, p. 9, 643 So.2d at 1233 ). 2018She relies on the state supreme court's decisions in Schultz v. Guoth , 10-343 (La. 1/19/11), 57 So.3d 1002 , and Pfiffner v. Correa , 94-924, 94-963, 94-992 (La. 10/17/94), 643 So.2d 1228 , for the proposition that she does not need an expert witness in this case to prove a breach of the standard of care because the lay fact finder "can infer negligence from the facts" testified to by Defendant or Defendant's expert witnesses. | 2 | 35 |
Taplin v. Lupingreen2 sentences2017App. 4 Cir. 10/1/97), 700 So.2d 1160, 1161 (La. 2011“To prove medical malpractice, the plaintiff must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, the applicable standard of care, a breach of that standard of care by the defendants, causation and damages.” Taplin v. Lupin, 97-1058, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/1/97), 700 So.2d 1160, 1161 (La.Ct.App.1997)(citing Bradford v. O’Neill, 95-2449 (La.App. 4th Cir. 11/20/96), 688 So.2d 33 , writ denied, 97-0803 (La.5/9/97), 693 So.2d 769 . | 2 | 2 |
Alex v. Dr. Xgreen2 sentences2007The burden thus shifted to Plaintiffs to "sufficiently establish the existence of proof of an essential element of [their] claim" which they "bear the burden of proving at trial." Alex v. Dr. X, 96-1196, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97), 692 So.2d 499, 502 (citing Short v. Giffin, 96-0361 (La.App. 4 Cir. 8/21/96) , 682 So.2d 249 , writ denied 96-3063 (La.3/7/97), 689 So.2d 1372 ). 2006The burden thus shifted to Plaintiffs to "sufficiently establish the existence of proof of an essential element of their claim on which they are to bear the burden of proving at trial." Alex v. Dr. X, 96-1196, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97), 692 So.2d 499, 502 (citing Short v. Giffin, 96-0361 (La.App. 4 Cir. 8/21/96) , 682 So.2d 249 , writ denied 96-3063 (La.3/7/97), 689 So.2d 1372 ). | 2 | 2 |
Samaha v. Raugreen2 sentences2020R.S. 9:2794, a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case is required to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, the following three elements: (i) the standard of care applicable to the defendant; (ii) the defendant’s breach of the standard of care; and (iii) the existence of a causal connection between the breach and the resulting injury.” Jordan v. Community Care Hosp., 2019-0039, p. 11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/24/19), 276 So.3d 564 , 575 (citing Samaha v. Rau, 2007-1726, p.5 (La. 2/26/08), 977 So.2d 880, 883-84 ). 2016PCS also cites Samaha v. Rau, 2007-1726 (La. 2/26/08), 977 So.2d 880, 883-884 , arguing that Byrd failed to produce expert medical testimony regarding the applicable standard of care, the breach of that standard, and a causal connection between the breach and the resulting harm, which are all elements that are required in an action sounding in medical malpractice. | 1 | 6 |
Browning v. West Calcasieu Cameron Hosp.green2 sentences2008"Thus, according to La.R.S. 9:2794(A), any medical malpractice claimant must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) the defendant's standard of care; (2) the defendant's breach of that standard of care; and (3) a causal connection between the breach and the claimant's injuries." Browning v. West Calcasieu Cameron Hosp., 03-332, p. 10 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/12/03), 865 So.2d 795, 804 (citing Pfiffner v. Correa, 94-924, 94-963, 94-992 (La.10/17/94), 643 So.2d 1228 ). 2007"Thus, according to La.R.S. 9:2794(A), any medical malpractice claimant must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) the defendant's standard of care; (2) the defendant's breach of that standard of care; and (3) a causal connection between the breach and the claimant's injuries." Browning v. West Calcasieu Cameron Hosp., 03-332, p. 10 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/12/03), 865 So.2d 795, 804 , writ denied, 03-3354 (La.12/13/04), 867 So.2d 691 (citing Pfiffner v. Correa, 94-924, 94-963, 94-992 (La.10/17/94), 643 So.2d 1228 ). | 1 | 3 |
Lieux v. Mitchellgreen2 sentences2010See Lieux, 06-0382 at 11, 951 So.2d at 315 (noting that the “requirement of producing expert medical testimony is especially apt when the defendant has filed a motion for summary judgment and supported such motion with expert opinion evidence .... ”); see also Guillory, 96-85 at 8-9, 679 So.2d at 1009 . 2010Lieux , 06-0382 at 11, 951 So.2d at 314 . | 1 | 2 |
Century Exploration New Orleans, Inc. v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2026The Court of Federal Claims has echoed this viewpoint: “When a plaintiff possesses enforceable rights under a contract with the government, ‘interference with such contractual rights generally gives rise to a breach claim not a taking claim.’” Century Exploration New Orleans, Inc. v. United States, 103 Fed. | 1 | 1 |
| Webb v. Lungstrumgreen | 1 | 1 |
Rogers v. Hilltop Retirement & Rehabilitation Centergreen1 sentence2023App. 3 Cir. 11 2/12/14), 153 So.3d 1053, 1060 (citing Pfiffner and observing that “[e]xpert testimony is also required to establish causation unless the causal connection between the breach of the standard and the plaintiff’s damages are obvious”). | 1 | 1 |
| Migues v. Sagreragreen | 1 | 1 |
| Levy v. Lewisgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Guillory v. Dr. Xgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Spencer v. Burglassgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Spencer v. Burglassgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Adams v. Rhodia, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| Gibson v. Bossier City General Hosp.green | 1 | 1 |
| Hoot v. Woman's Hosp. Foundationgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Bellard v. Willis Knighton Medical Centergreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Schultz v. Guoth
green
2 sentences2018She relies on the state supreme court's decisions in Schultz v. Guoth , 10-343 (La. 1/19/11), 57 So.3d 1002 , and Pfiffner v. Correa , 94-924, 94-963, 94-992 (La. 10/17/94), 643 So.2d 1228 , for the proposition that she does not need an expert witness in this case to prove a breach of the standard of care because the lay fact finder "can infer negligence from the facts" testified to by Defendant or Defendant's expert witnesses. 2018Schultz , 57 So.3d at 1009 . | 7 | 2013–2018 |
Bradford v. O'NEILL
neutral
2 sentences2011“To prove medical malpractice, the plaintiff must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, the applicable standard of care, a breach of that standard of care by the defendants, causation and damages.” Taplin v. Lupin, 97-1058, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/1/97), 700 So.2d 1160, 1161 (La.Ct.App.1997)(citing Bradford v. O’Neill, 95-2449 (La.App. 4th Cir. 11/20/96), 688 So.2d 33 , writ denied, 97-0803 (La.5/9/97), 693 So.2d 769 . 1998It is well settled in our jurisprudence that “[t]o prove medical malpractice, the plaintiff must establish by a preponderance of the evidence: the standard of care, a breach of that standard, causation, and damages.” Pellerin v. Humedicenters, Inc. 96-1996 (La.App. 4th Cir. 6/11/97), 696 So.2d 590, 592 (citations omitted); Bradford v. O’Neill, 95-2449, 95-2450 (La.App. 4th Cir.11/20/96), 688 So.2d 33 , writ denied, 97-0803 (La.5/9/97), 693 So.2d 769 . | 4 | 1997–2011 |
Saacks v. City of New Orleans
green
2 sentences2011“To prove medical malpractice, the plaintiff must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, the applicable standard of care, a breach of that standard of care by the defendants, causation and damages.” Taplin v. Lupin, 97-1058, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/1/97), 700 So.2d 1160, 1161 (La.Ct.App.1997)(citing Bradford v. O’Neill, 95-2449 (La.App. 4th Cir. 11/20/96), 688 So.2d 33 , writ denied, 97-0803 (La.5/9/97), 693 So.2d 769 . 1998It is well settled in our jurisprudence that “[t]o prove medical malpractice, the plaintiff must establish by a preponderance of the evidence: the standard of care, a breach of that standard, causation, and damages.” Pellerin v. Humedicenters, Inc. 96-1996 (La.App. 4th Cir. 6/11/97), 696 So.2d 590, 592 (citations omitted); Bradford v. O’Neill, 95-2449, 95-2450 (La.App. 4th Cir.11/20/96), 688 So.2d 33 , writ denied, 97-0803 (La.5/9/97), 693 So.2d 769 . | 3 | 1997–2011 |
Orea v. Brannan
neutral
2 sentences2006LSA-R.S. 9:2794(A); Britt v. Taylor, 37,378 (La.App. 2d Cir.8/20/03), 852 So.2d 1128 ; Orea v. Brannan, 30,628 (La.App. 2d Cir.6/24/98), 715 So.2d 108 . 2006LSA-R.S. 9:2794(A); Britt v. Taylor, 37,378 (La.App.2d Cir.8/20/03), 852 So.2d 1128 ; Orea v. Brannan, 30,628 (La.App.2d Cir.6/24/98), 715 So.2d 108 . | 3 | 2003–2006 |
Alello v. Smith
neutral
2 sentences2005Allello v. Smith, 94-103, (La. 5th Cir.7/26/94), 641 So.2d 664 , citing Smith v. State through Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 523 So.2d 815, 819 (La.1988). 2002Smith v. State through Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 523 So.2d 815, 819 (La.1988); Alello v. Smith, 94-103 (La.App. 5 Cir. 7/26/94) , 641 So.2d 664, 671 , writ denied, 94-2231 (La.11/18/94), 646 So.2d 382 . | 3 | 2002–2005 |
Roy Bufkin, Jr. v. Felipe's Louisiana, LLC
green
2 sentences2018Id. "[W]hether a duty is owed is a question of law." Id. at 855 . 2018Id. "[W]hether a duty is owed is a question of law." Id. at 855 . | 2 | 2018–2018 |
LeBlanc v. Barry
neutral
2 sentences2015Leblanc v. Barry, 00-709, p. 3 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/28/01), 790 So.2d 75, 78-79 . 2005Leblanc v. Barry, 00-707, p. 3 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/28/01), 790 So.2d 75, 78-79 . | 2 | 2005–2015 |
Weeks v. Brown
neutral
2 sentences2008La.R.S. 9:2794; Pfiffner v. Correa, 94-924, 94-963, 94-992 (La. 10/17/94), 643 So.2d 1228 ; Weeks v. Brown, 01-495 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/01) , 796 So.2d 839 . 2006La.R.S. 9:2794; Pfiffner v. Correa, 94-0924, 94-0963, 94-0992 (La. 10/17/94), 643 So.2d 1228 ; Weeks v. Brown, 01-00495 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/01) , 796 So.2d 839 . | 2 | 2006–2008 |
Short v. Giffin
green
2 sentences2007The burden thus shifted to Plaintiffs to "sufficiently establish the existence of proof of an essential element of [their] claim" which they "bear the burden of proving at trial." Alex v. Dr. X, 96-1196, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97), 692 So.2d 499, 502 (citing Short v. Giffin, 96-0361 (La.App. 4 Cir. 8/21/96) , 682 So.2d 249 , writ denied 96-3063 (La.3/7/97), 689 So.2d 1372 ). 2006The burden thus shifted to Plaintiffs to "sufficiently establish the existence of proof of an essential element of their claim on which they are to bear the burden of proving at trial." Alex v. Dr. X, 96-1196, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97), 692 So.2d 499, 502 (citing Short v. Giffin, 96-0361 (La.App. 4 Cir. 8/21/96) , 682 So.2d 249 , writ denied 96-3063 (La.3/7/97), 689 So.2d 1372 ). | 2 | 2006–2007 |
Browning v. West Calcasieu Cameron Hosp.
green
2 sentences2007"Thus, according to La.R.S. 9:2794(A), any medical malpractice claimant must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) the defendant's standard of care; (2) the defendant's breach of that standard of care; and (3) a causal connection between the breach and the claimant's injuries." Browning v. West Calcasieu Cameron Hosp., 03-332, p. 10 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/12/03), 865 So.2d 795, 804 , writ denied, 03-3354 (La.12/13/04), 867 So.2d 691 (citing Pfiffner v. Correa, 94-924, 94-963, 94-992 (La.10/17/94), 643 So.2d 1228 ). 2007"Thus, according to La.R.S. 9:2794(A), any medical malpractice claimant must establish, by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) the defendant's standard of care; (2) the defendant's breach of that standard of care; and (3) a causal connection between the breach and the claimant's injuries." Browning v. West Calcasieu Cameron Hosp., 03-332, p. 10 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/12/03), 865 So.2d 795, 804 , writ denied, 03-3354 (La.2/13/04), 867 So.2d 691 (citing Pfiffner v. Correa, 94-924, 94-963, 94-992 (La.10/17/94), 643 So.2d 1228 ). | 2 | 2007–2007 |
Short v. Giffin
green
2 sentences2007The burden thus shifted to Plaintiffs to "sufficiently establish the existence of proof of an essential element of [their] claim" which they "bear the burden of proving at trial." Alex v. Dr. X, 96-1196, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97), 692 So.2d 499, 502 (citing Short v. Giffin, 96-0361 (La.App. 4 Cir. 8/21/96) , 682 So.2d 249 , writ denied 96-3063 (La.3/7/97), 689 So.2d 1372 ). 2006The burden thus shifted to Plaintiffs to "sufficiently establish the existence of proof of an essential element of their claim on which they are to bear the burden of proving at trial." Alex v. Dr. X, 96-1196, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97), 692 So.2d 499, 502 (citing Short v. Giffin, 96-0361 (La.App. 4 Cir. 8/21/96) , 682 So.2d 249 , writ denied 96-3063 (La.3/7/97), 689 So.2d 1372 ). | 2 | 2006–2007 |
Britt v. Taylor
neutral
2 sentences2006LSA-R.S. 9:2794(A); Britt v. Taylor, 37,378 (La.App. 2d Cir.8/20/03), 852 So.2d 1128 ; Orea v. Brannan, 30,628 (La.App. 2d Cir.6/24/98), 715 So.2d 108 . 2006LSA-R.S. 9:2794(A); Britt v. Taylor, 37,378 (La.App.2d Cir.8/20/03), 852 So.2d 1128 ; Orea v. Brannan, 30,628 (La.App.2d Cir.6/24/98), 715 So.2d 108 . | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Gordon v. Willis Knighton Medical Center
green
2 sentences2004See Bellard v. Willis Knighton Medical Center, 34,360 (La.App. 2 Cir. 5/9/01), 786 So.2d 218 ; Piro v. Chandler, 33,953 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/00), 780 So.2d 394 ; Gordon v. Willis Knighton Medical Center, 27,044 (La.App. 2 Cir. 6/21/95), 661 So.2d 991 , writ denied, 95-2776 (La.1/26/96), 666 So.2d 679 and writ denied, 95-2783 (La.1/26/96), 666 So.2d 679 . 2004See Bellard v. Willis Knighton Medical Center, 34,360 (La.App. 2 Cir. 5/9/01), 786 So.2d 218 ; Piro v. Chandler, 33,953 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/00), 780 So.2d 394 ; Gordon v. Willis Knighton Medical Center, 27,044 (La.App. 2 Cir. 6/21/95), 661 So.2d 991 , writ denied, 95-2776 (La.1/26/96), 666 So.2d 679 and writ denied, 95-2783 (La.1/26/96), 666 So.2d 679 . | 2 | 1997–2004 |
Gordon v. Willis Knighton Medical Center
green
2 sentences2004See Bellard v. Willis Knighton Medical Center, 34,360 (La.App. 2 Cir. 5/9/01), 786 So.2d 218 ; Piro v. Chandler, 33,953 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/1/00), 780 So.2d 394 ; Gordon v. Willis Knighton Medical Center, 27,044 (La.App. 2 Cir. 6/21/95), 661 So.2d 991 , writ denied, 95-2776 (La.1/26/96), 666 So.2d 679 and writ denied, 95-2783 (La.1/26/96), 666 So.2d 679 . 1997LSA-R.S. 9:2794 A; Byrd v. State, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, 93-2765, p. 15 (La.5/23/94); 637 So.2d 114, 122 ; Donaldson v. Sanders, 94-1366, p. 5 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 7/19/95); 661 So.2d 1010, 1014 , writ granted, 95-2940 (La.2/28/96); 668 So.2d 363 ; Gordon v. Willis Knighton Medical Center, 27,044 (La.App. 2nd Cir. 6/21/95); 661 So.2d 991, 997 , writs denied, 95-2776, 95-2783 (La.1/26/96); 666 So.2d 679 . | 2 | 1997–2004 |
Alello v. Smith
neutral
2 sentences2002Smith v. State through Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 523 So.2d 815, 819 (La.1988); Alello v. Smith, 94-103 (La.App. 5 Cir. 7/26/94) , 641 So.2d 664, 671 , writ denied, 94-2231 (La.11/18/94), 646 So.2d 382 . 2002Smith v. State through Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 523 So.2d 815, 819 (La.1988); Alello v. Smith, 94-103 (La.App. 5 Cir. 7/26/94) , 641 So.2d 664, 671 , writ denied, 94-2231 (La.11/18/94), 646 So.2d 382 . | 2 | 2002–2002 |
Byrd v. STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFETY
green
2 sentences1997LSA-R.S. 9:2794 A; Byrd v. State, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, 93-2765, p. 15 (La.5/23/94); 637 So.2d 114, 122 ; Donaldson v. Sanders, 94-1366, p. 5 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 7/19/95); 661 So.2d 1010, 1014 , writ granted, 95-2940 (La.2/28/96); 668 So.2d 363 ; Gordon v. Willis Knighton Medical Center, 27,044 (La.App. 2nd Cir. 6/21/95); 661 So.2d 991, 997 , writs denied, 95-2776, 95-2783 (La.1/26/96); 666 So.2d 679 . 1995La.R.S. 9:2794; Byrd v. State, Through Dept. of Public Safety, 93-2765 (La. 5/23/94); 637 So.2d 114 . | 2 | 1995–1997 |
Austin v. Fibrebond Corp.
green
1 sentence2025App. 2 Cir. 2/23/94), writ denied, 94-1326 (La. 9/2/94), 643 So. 2d 149 . 14 Since we find that the jury erroneously found that plaintiffs did not meet their burden of proving the standard of care, the jury never reached the issues of the breach of the standard of care, causation, and damages. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
DUPAR v. ESTATE OF McNEAL
green
1 sentence2023R.S. 9:2794, this Court has held that a medical malpractice plaintiff must establish the applicable standard of care and a breach of that standard of care, as well as “a causal connection between the physician’s alleged negligence and the plaintiff’s injuries resulting therefrom.” McCarter, 2009-1508, p. 2, 44 So.3d at 346 (quoting Pfiffner, 1994-0992, 0963, 0992, p. 9, 643 So.2d at 1233 ). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Jackson v. STATE THROUGH CHARITY HOSP.
green
1 sentence2023App. 4 Cir. 5/16/95), 655 So.2d 795, 796 , we observed: La.R.S. 9:2794 states, in pertinent part, that in a malpractice action based on the negligence of a physician, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence: 1) the standard of medical care for the medical specialty involved; 2) that the defendant breached the standard of care; and 3) that the plaintiff suffered injuries due to the breach of the standard of care. 13 Here, as Ms. Ganoza contends, the summary judgment record in this case contains “some” expert testimony establishing that a reasonable therapeutic alternative ex | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Djorghi v. Glass
green
1 sentence2023Id. (quoting Serigne v. Ivker, 2000-0758, pp. 5-6 (La. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
| Beilenson v. Jefferson Parish Hospital Service District No. 2 neutral | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Salvador v. Main St. Family Pharmacy, L.L.C. green | 1 | 2021–2021 |
| Deruise-Pierce v. Univ. Healthcare Sys., L.C. green | 1 | 2019–2019 |
| Scott v. Leonard J. Chabert Medical Center green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| Wansley v. ABC Insurance Co. neutral | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| David Pitts Jr. and Kenyetta Gurley v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Company and Rhoda Renee Jones, M.D. green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Pitts v. Louisiana Medical Mutual Insurance Co. green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Labit v. Cobb neutral | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Smith v. State Dept. of Health & Hosp. green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Bianchi v. KUFOY green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Graham v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Lindner v. Hoffman green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Caldwell v. LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL FEST. green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Newsom v. Lake Charles Memorial Hosp. green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Sutton Steel & Supply, Inc. v. BellSouth Mobility, Inc. neutral | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Marroy v. Hertzak neutral | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| State v. Martin neutral | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Wilson ex rel. Brown v. Touro Infirmary neutral | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Royal M. Ladnier v. Gary L. Norwood, D.V.M. green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| Dyess v. Caraway green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.