Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 127 SO2D 467 - Baskin v. Griffith

Baskin v. Griffith’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
states following
April 2014
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently April 2014

22 state decisions

100196119701980199020002010decided

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 89 So. 2d 482 - Connolly v. Sebeco, Inc. · Van Meter v. Kelsey · Board of Com'rs of State Inst. v. TALLAHASSEE B. & T. CO. · Weber v. Porco · 81 So. 2d 734 - Trueman Fertilizer Co. v. Allison

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.

  1. “"* * * This is something more than a mere `changing of judicial caps.' With [sic] a judge hears the motion for summary final decree, his function is to determine whether there is a genuine issue as to any material fact and whether the moving party is entitled to a final decree as a matter of law. When the judge is considering the entry of a final decree after a full hearing on the merits, he, as the trier of the facts, determines controverted factual issues, and draws inferences of fact from the substantial, competent evidence adduced by the parties."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““ * * * the passage of time and nothing more activates a statute of limitation, but lapse of time alone is insufficient to support a finding of laches. Trueman Fertilizer Company v. Allison, Fla.1955, 81 So.2d 734 ; Cook v. Navy Point, Inc., Fla.1956, 88 So.2d 532 . The applicability of the doctrine of laches depends upon the facts of the particular case. Wiggins v. Lykes Bros., Inc., Fla.1957, 97 So.2d 273 . Lashes is principally a question of the inequity of permitting a claim to be enforced by equitable remedies in the face of a change in the conditions or relations of the parties occasioned by a delay that works a disadvantage to him against whom equitable relief is sought. Sharrow v. City of Dania, 1938, 131 Fla. 641 , 180 So. 18 . The test of laches is whether there has been a delay which has resulted in injury, embarrassment, or disadvantage of any person, but particularly the person against zvhom relief is sought. City of Eustis v. Firster, Fla.App.1959, 113 So. 2d 260 .” (Emphasis supplied).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “* * * * * * "Statutes of limitation which declare that certain causes of action are unenforceable if actions thereon are filed more than a certain fixed period after the accrual of the cause of action, are not applied in courts of equity, which instead may apply the rules of laches, but such courts usually act or refuse to act on the basis of the provisions of statutes of limitations which relate to actions at law of like character." * * * * * * Section 95.11, Fla. Stat., F.S.A., provides: "Actions other than those for recovery of real property can only be commenced as follows: "(7) Within one year. — "(b) Suits for recovery of wages, overtime, or damages and penalties accruing under laws respecting the payment of wages and overtime."”
    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.