Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 14 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Barkerding v. Whittaker.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Barkerding v. Whittaker Anchor | green | “varies based on whether evidence was introduced in the trial court at the hearing on the exception.” | 6 |
| 2 | London Towne Condo. Ass'n v. LONDON TOWNE | green | “when prescription is raised by peremptory exception, with evidence being introduced at the hearing on the exception, the trial court's findings of fact on the issue of prescription are subject to the manifest error-clearly wrong standard of review.” | 5 |
| 3 | Carter v. Haygood | green | “however, if prescription is evident on the face of the pleadings, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show the action has not prescribed.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.