342 So. 2d 815 - Fleeman v. Case’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably 434 So. 2d 321 - State v. Lavazzoli (1983), 344 So. 2d 239 - Walker & LaBerge, Inc. v. Halligan (1977)
2 federal appellate · 57 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 316 So. 2d 557 - Yamaha Parts Distributors Inc. v. Ehrman · 283 So. 2d 99 - Metropolitan Dade Cty. Ta v. State Dept. Hs & Mv · 278 So. 2d 606 - Keystone Water Company, Inc. v. Bevis · 277 So. 2d 260 - Williston Highlands Development Corp. v. Hogue · DIVISION OF BEVERAGE, ETC. v. Foremost-McKesson, 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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Even were we to conclude that the Legislature intended retroactive application of this statute, we would be compelled to hold it invalid as impairing the obligation of contract under Article I, Section 10 of both the United States and Florida Constitutions. Yamaha Parts Distributors, Inc. v. Ehrman, 316 So.2d 557 (Fla. 1975). While we ordinarily do not reach constitutional questions not necessary to the disposition of the case, in this instance the principal contention of the parties and the rulings of the trial courts below were predicated on this constitutional issue. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to resolve this issue in this proceeding."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) If the court as a matter of law finds the contract or any clause of the contract to have been unconscionable at the time it was made the court may refuse to enforce the contract, or it may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or it may so limit the application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result. (2) When it is claimed or appears to the court that the contract or any clause thereof may be unconscionable the parties shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present evidence as to its commercial setting, purpose and effect to aid the court in making the determination.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Given the narrow issue presented by these appeals we do not decide questions as to the validity of these leases on any other grounds. Thus, although there is reference to the possibility that in some instances lease arrangements for individual unit owners may be unconscionable, inequitable or contain other deficiencies recognized in law as a basis for judicial invalidation, these matters are not considered or decided here."”
2 later decisions 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.