Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 216 SO2D 769 - Crawford v. DiMicco

Crawford v. DiMicco’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
4
states following
December 2011
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently December 2011 · most notably 178 Ill. App. 3d 741 - Joe & Dan International Corp. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. (1988), 458 So. 2d 335 - Ashby Division of Consolidated Aluminum Corp. v. Dobkin (1984)

2 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

110196819701980199020002010decided

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 66 So. 2d 684 - Higbee v. Dorigo · 160 So. 2d 132 - Isenberg v. Ortona Park Recreational Center, Inc. · Ledbetter v. Farmers Bank & Trust Co.

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

  1. “Where the findings of a jury's verdict in two or more respects are findings with respect to a definite fact material to the judgment such that both cannot be true and therefore stand at the same time, they are in fatal conflict. In such circumstances, contradictory findings mutually destroy each other and result in no valid verdict, and a trial court's judgment based thereupon is erroneous.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The facts as alluded to above are simple, and the law is equally so. It has long been well settled that an agent owes to his principal the obligation of high fidelity, and that he may not proceed without or beyond his authority, particularly where he has been forbidden to act and that so proceeding, his actions caused loss to his principal, the agent is fully accountable to the principal therefor.”
    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.