Gaston v. Pittman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

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

1. ““Whether under Florida law a divorced woman can maintain an action against her former husband for a tort committed by him prior to their marriage.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Gaston v. Pittman · 224 So. 2d 326 - Gaston v. Pittman

2. “"Appellant brought this action seeking to recover damages for the death of her minor child, born during a prior marriage, allegedly caused by the negligence of the defendant-appellee. Thereafter, plaintiff and the defendant were married. They were divorced on January 18, 1966, and plaintiff subsequently initiated this suit. The United States District Court held that the wife's action had been extinguished upon her marriage to the defendant by virtue of the common law theory of the unity of husband and wife, as recognized and applied by Florida courts, Bencomo v. Bencomo, Fla. 1967, 200 So.2d 171 . Accordingly, the Court entered a summary final judgment in favor of the defendant and dismissed the complaint. "Plaintiff, citing Amendola v. Amendola, Fla.App. 1960, 121 So.2d 805 as authority for her position, argues that her `cause of action,' the substantive right, was vested and therefore unaffected by her marriage to the defendant, and further, that her `right of action,' the procedural right, though barred during coveture, was only `abated or suspended,' and therefore revived by the divorce. The district judge concluded, however, that statements in Florida decisions, notably Webster v. Snyder, 1932, 103 Fla. 1131 , 138 So. 755 and Amendola v. Amendola, supra, to the effect that the wife's `right of action' was `abated or suspended' during the marriage meant that the wife's action was extinguished or terminated by the marriage. Accordingly, even if the `cause of action' were v”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 224 So. 2d 326 - Gaston v. Pittman