358 So. 2d 1311 - Thomas v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently September 1991
4 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 Nelms & Blum Co. v. Fink · Dugan v. Haige · Brush v. Laurendine · Herrin v. State · Coburn v. State
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The reasons for the rule are that we cannot put the trial judge in error on a question not passed upon by him, and also that a litigant cannot wait, without objection, and take chances on a jury verdict, and when the verdict is against him, then take advantage of a motion he should have made at the proper time." 358 So.2d at 1313 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. White v. State
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.