Stanek v. Houston’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently June 1991
13 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 100 So. 2d 620 - Thomason v. Miami Transit Company · Black v. Heininger
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) the instrumentality involved was within the exclusive control of the defendant at the time of the injury, both as to operation and inspection; (2) the injury was not the result of any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the plaintiff; and (3) the accident would not have occurred had the defendant used due care."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The creation of a presumption would have the effect of making a prima facie case without more. The creation of an inference merely enables the jury to draw the inference and weigh it in the balance with all of the other evidence. (Emphasis added). See also Stanek v. Houston, 165 So.2d 825, 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“An inference is a deduction from facts which reason dictates, but a presumption is an arbitrary conclusion which the law directs to be made from certain facts.”
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.