Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 367 SO2D 314 - Wilson v. Magee

Wilson v. Magee’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
1
states following
March 2012
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 55 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably 373 So. 2d 498 - Reck v. Stevens (1979), Rando v. Anco Insulations Inc. (2009)

1 federal appellate · 55 state decisions

40019791980199020002010decided

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 341 So. 2d 332 - Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc. · Bitoun v. Landry · Anderson v. Welding Testing Laboratory, Inc. · 346 So. 2d 196 - Schexnayder v. Carpenter · 353 So. 2d 249 - Carollo v. Wilson

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

  1. “"The courts of appeal have a constitutional duty to review the law and facts and thereafter render a judgment of quantum based on the merits, determining whether the jury has abused its `much discretion' that the law accords it in awarding damages. [Citations omitted.] Before an appellate court can disturb an award made by a trial court, the record must clearly reveal that the trier of fact abused its discretion in making its award. [Citations omitted.] In the event the appellate court finds from the record an abuse of discretion, the award may be disturbed by lowering it to the highest point which is reasonably within the discretion afforded the trier of fact. [Citations omitted]."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Before an appellate court can disturb an award made by a trial court, the record must clearly reveal that the trier of fact abused its discretion in making its award. (citations omitted) In the event the appellate court finds from the record an abuse of discretion, the award may be disturbed by lowering it to the highest point which is reasonably within the discretion afforded the trier of fact. (citations omitted)”
    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.