Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 175 SO2D 526 - Markham v. Blount

Markham v. Blount’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
1
states following
May 2001
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently May 2001 · most notably 176 So. 2d 81 - Walter v. Schuler (1965), Powell v. Kelly (1969)

27 state decisions

16019651970198019902000decided

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 Curry v. Lehman · City of St. Petersburg v. Pinellas County Power Co. · Howarth, Et Ux. v. City of Deland · 156 So. 2d 833 - Tyson v. Lanier · Lanier v. Overstreet

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

  1. “"The court further finds, determines and declares that there is little, if any, difference in law between `true cash value,' `full cash value,' `just value' and words of like or similar import; * * * that insofar as Section 193.11(3), Florida Statutes, is concerned, it controls the assessment of agricultural land therein, described as lands `being used for bona fide farming, pasture, grove or forestry operations,' within the purview of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Florida in the case of Tyson vs. Lanier, Fla. 1963, 156 So.2d 833 , and specifically means that the just valuation of such lands is to be determined from their bona fide use as such farming, pasture, grove or forestry operations, as contemplated by Subsection 3 of Section 193.11, Florida Statutes, and not their value for collateral and other unlimited purposes, not of an agricultural nature. In reading the factors of `just valuation' prescribed by Section 193.021 for agricultural property, the agricultural factor must be taken into account as the only factor in each instance, concerning agricultural land. * * * The Court finds, determines and declares that it does not matter if the value of a specific piece of agricultural property would be higher if assessed in accordance with the criteria provided in Section 193.021 only, but the Plaintiff must nevertheless assess agricultural lands at only their value for agricultural use, and must take no other factors into consideration."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “where the courts can, in construing two statutes, preserve the force of both without destroying their evident intent, it is their duty to do so.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.