Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 427 SO2D 374 - Nostrand v. Olivieri

Nostrand v. Olivieri’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
7
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably State ex rel. Roy Allen S. v. Stone (1996), STATE EX REL. ROY ALLEN v. Stone (1996)

30 state decisions

1301983199020002010decided

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 Quilloin v. Walcott · Caban v. Mohammed · Parham v. Hughes · Eldridge v. Eldridge · 88 So. 2d 551 - Charles Sales Corp. v. Rovenger

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

  1. “that he has manifested a substantial concern for the welfare of his illegitimate child”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Thus, it cannot be said as a matter of law that Olivieri is precluded from seeking an adjudication that he is Christie's father. As a condition of obtaining such an adjudication, he must prove standing by showing "that he has manifested a substantial concern for the welfare of his illegitimate child". [citation omitted.] There has not yet been a determination that he has the requisite standing. Ordinarily, the fact that a party may not be able to sustain his complaint does not serve to prevent him from obtaining full discovery on matters relevant to the issues in the case. See Deltona Corp. v. Bailey, 336 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 1976). However, we believe this case is exceptional because of the sensitive nature of the subject matter and the irreparable harm which could occur if Olivieri should fail to prove standing. We hold that in cases such as this, before a putative father may obtain discovery relating to the paternity of the child, he must first prove the requisite standing to go forward with the suit. Presumably, this will require a bifurcated proceeding in which the issue of standing is first resolved.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The foregoing rationale effectively forecloses the mother's cause of action. She acknowledged in the marital separation agreement that Christie was born of her marriage to Van Nostrand. She sought and obtained an order requiring Van Nostrand to pay child support. She cannot now contend that Van Nostrand is not Christie's father.”
    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.