Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 414 SO2D 255 - Maass v. Christensen

Maass v. Christensen’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
May 2008
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 2008

7 state decisions

50198219902000decided

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 Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. American District Electric Protective Co. · Pender v. Skillcraft Industries, Inc. · 285 So. 2d 29 - Glusman v. Lieberman · 177 So. 2d 486 - Gates v. Utsey · Lehman v. Goldin

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

  1. “Sec. 624. General Rule. One who, without a privilege to do so, publishes matter which is untrue and disparaging to another's property, in land, chattels or intangible things under such circumstances as would lead a reasonable man to foresee that the conduct of a third person as purchaser or lessee thereof might be determined thereby is liable for pecuniary loss resulting to the other from the impairment of vendibility thus caused. Sec. 625. Intention—Scienter—Malice. One who publishes matter disparaging to another's property in land, chattels or intangible things is subject to liability under the rule stated in Sec. 624 although he (a) did not intend to influence a third person's conduct as purchaser or lessee of the thing in question (b) neither knew nor believed the disparaging matter to be false; (c) did not publish such matter from ill will toward the other or a desire to cause him loss. Sec. 626. Disparaging Statements of Fact. One who without a privilege to do so published an untrue statement of fact which is disparaging to the quality of another's land, chattels or intangible things, under circumstances which would lead a reasonable man to foresee that the conduct of a third person as purchaser or lessee thereof would be determined thereby, is liable for pecuniary loss resulting to the other from the impairment of vendibility so caused.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “tie[d] assigned parking spaces to apartment ownership.”
    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.