Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 217 SO3D 125 - Wheaton v. Wheaton

Wheaton v. Wheaton’s Empirical Analysis

2017

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

7 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 930 So. 2d 598 - Saia Motor Freight Line, Inc. v. Reid · 715 So. 2d 241 - Brown v. State · Ryland v. State · 160 So. 3d 567 - Chiquita Kiara Floyd v. Stacy L. Smith, Jason Owen Smith

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

  1. “[t]he offer shall be served upon the party to whom it is made, but it shall not be filed unless it is accepted or unless filing is necessary to enforce the provisions of this section.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “permitted to be served on another party.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(i) All documents served by e-mail must be sent by an e-mail message containing a subject line beginning with the words "SERVICE OF COURT DOCUMENT" in all capital letters, followed by the case number and case style of the proceeding in which the documents are being served. (ii) The body of the e-mail must identify the court in which the proceeding is pending, the case number, the name of the initial party on each side, the title of each document served with that e-mail, and the name and telephone number of the person required to serve the document. (iii) Any document served by e-mail may be signed by any of the "/s/," "/s," or "s/" formats. (iv) Any e-mail which, together with its attached documents, exceeds the appropriate size limitations specified in the Florida Supreme Court Standards for Electronic Access to the Court, must be divided and sent as separate e-mails, no one of which may exceed the appropriate size limitations specified in the Florida Supreme Court Standards for Electronic Access to the Court and each of which must be sequentially numbered in the subject line.”
    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.