114 So. 2d 791 - Duval v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently December 2011 · most notably 280 So. 2d 431 - Hoffman v. Jones (1973), 780 So. 2d 45 - Beal Bank, SSB v. Almand and Associates (2001)
35 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Banfield Et Ux. v. Addington Et Ux. · Waller v. First Savings & Trust Co. · 61 So. 2d 420 - Ripley v. Ewell · Smoulter v. Boyd · Sanders, Jr. v. De Rose
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`broad discretion' taking `into account the changes in our social and economic customs and present day conceptions of right and justice.'”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage““We are not advised, and our own research has not divulged the clear, unambiguous pronouncement of the common law in effect 4 July 1776, that would leave us no room but to. adopt it in this case under the mandate of Sec. 2.01, supra [citations omitted]. As has been remarked by this-court, when grave doubt exists of a true common law doctrine * * * we may, as was written in Ripley v. Ewell, supra [ 61 So.2d 420 ], exercise a ‘broad discretion’ taking ‘into account the changes in our social and economic customs and present day conceptions, of right and justice.’ It is, to repeat, only when the common law is plain that we must observe it.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Florida is advertised as a playground, a retreat from the hurryscurry of the modern world and from the rigors of northern climes. Fishing and swimming are prominent if not principal items of the entertainment the stranger expects to find here. If the enjoyment of non-navigable lakes were to be curtailed or restricted by a holding that the owner of a portion of one of them, and his guests, should enjoy the waters only within the property lines the damage would be immeasurable.” 114 So. 2d 791, 795 .”
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.