Haigler v. Ingle’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 state decisions

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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"This cause came before the Court upon the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and for Dissolution of Temporary Injunction, and upon the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. "Previously, the Court heard argument on Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, during which argument the parties stipulated as follows to the only two possible disputed factual issues, to wit: "(1) That as of the date of execution of the agreement upon which the Plaintiff bases its action, that property commonly known as Live Oaks Nursing Home, 2200 N.W. 26th Street, Miami, Florida constituted the entire corporate assets of the defendant corporation; "(2) That an inventory of furnishings and equipment was not attached to that instrument captioned option, a copy of which is attached to Amended Complaint as Plaintiff's Exhibit A, at the time of execution of said instrument. "The parties agreed that there is no dispute as to other material facts and that the only issues to be determined in this cause are issues of law. The Court concurs. Upon consideration of memoranda, pleadings, depositions, affidavits and matter of which the Court has taken Judicial notice, the Court finds that there is no material factual issue to be determined in this cause. "The undisputed facts in this cause clearly establish that title to that property of the Defendant, passed to and vested in Dade County solely as a consequence of the County's exercise of its powers of eminent domain and not as the result of a vo”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 340 So. 2d 1254 - Keyes Co. v. Florida Nursing Corp.

2. ““In plaintiff’s brief it is said, with commendable frankness, that the real question for determination here is, ‘Did condemnation constitute sale entitling broker to commission ? ’ In Wilson v. Frederick R. Ross Investment Co., 116 Colo. 249 [ 180 P.2d 226 , 170 A.L.R 1410], a very similar, if not identical question was presented, and therein we held adversely to plaintiff’s contention here. We there ruled that where title to lands is acquired in eminent domain proceedings, this does not constitute a sale such as would ordinarily entitle a broker, with whom the lands were listed for sale, to a commission under his contract of listing.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 196 Cal. App. 2d 43 - Preston v. Carnation Co.