133 So. 2d 735 - Sun Insurance Office, Limited v. Clay’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2017 · most notably Martinez v. Rodriquez (1968), Clay v. Sun Insurance Office, Ltd. (1964)
23 federal appellate · 35 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · County of Allegheny v. Frank Mashuda Co. · Meredith v. City of Winter Haven · Harrison v. National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People · Matthews v. Rodgers
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is a fundamental principle of constitutional law that each department of government * * has, without any express grant, the inherent right to accomplish all objects naturally within the orbit of that department * * *.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“`any contract whatever' foreign or domestic when Florida's contact therewith, existing at the time of its execution or occurring thereafter, is sufficient to give a court of this state jurisdiction of a suit thereon.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“All provisions and stipulations contained in any contract whatever entered into after May 26, 1913 fixing the period of time in which suits may be instituted under any such contract, or upon any matter growing out of the provisions of any such contract, at a period of time less than that provided by the statute of limitations of this state, are hereby declared to be contrary to the public policy of this state, and to be illegal and void. No court in this state shall give effect to any provision or stipulation of the character mentioned in this section.”
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.