168 So. 3d 649 - Millender v. Basf Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 617 So. 2d 880 - Stobart v. State Through DOTD · Sistler v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. · 593 So. 2d 357 - Bruno v. Harbert Intern. Inc. · Banks v. Indus. Roofing & Sheet Metal · Brown v. Texas-LA Cartage, Inc.
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In workers’ compensation cases, the appropriate standard of review to be applied by appellate courts is the manifest error-clearly wrong standard. To reverse a factual finding by a workers’ compensation judge, , the appellate court must find from the record that a reasonable factual basis does not exist for the finding of the judge and that the record establishes that the finding .is clearly wrong. The issue to be resolved by the Previewing court is not whether the trier of fact was right or wrong, but whether the fact-finder’s conclusion was a reasonable one. Where two permissible views of the evidence exist in a workers’ compensation . case, the factfinder’s choice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong.”
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.