Lundquist v. Alewine’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently January 2015
1 federal appellate · 11 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 Florida Bar · Myers v. Hodges · Abraham v. Baldwin · Leonard, Et Vir v. Wilson · Montgomery v. Knox
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In ruling on a motion for directed verdict, the trial court is required to resolve all facts and inferences reasonably to be drawn from the evidence in favor of the party against whom the ruling is sought, and where the evidence is such that reasonable minds could reach different conclusions, the motion must be denied and the matter submitted to the jury. Further, in ruling on a motion for directed verdict, the trial court should not pass on the credibility of witnesses or weigh the evidence, as this is the province of the jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[M]alice is an essential element of slander and may be presumed by the actionable per se nature of the alleged publication. Where however, a qualified privilege exists, a plaintiff must prove express malice or malice in fact in order to recover.”
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.