Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 451 So. 2d 219 - Stringfellow v. Stringfellow

451 So. 2d 219 - Stringfellow v. Stringfellow’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

109
cited by 109 later decisions
2
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

109 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 109 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Stanton & Associates v. Bryant Const. Co. (1985), 501 So. 2d 377 - Guaranty Nat. Ins. Co. v. Pittman (1987)

109 state decisions

4001984199020002010decided

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 444 So. 2d 358 - Brown v. Credit Center, Inc. · Rozier v. Ford Motor Co. · Hoffman v. Celebrezze · Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,670 John Bershad v. Bernard P. McDonough and Cudahy Company · Clarke v. Burkle

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

  1. “Further, Rule 60(b) motions should be denied where they are merely an attempt to relitigate the case.”
    43 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(b) Mistakes; Inadvertence; Newly Discovered Evidence; Fraud, etc. On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of the adverse party; (2) accident or mistake; (3) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; (6) any other reason justifying relief from judgment. . . . .”
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “this court [sic] will consider as authoritative federal constructions when determining what our construction of our rule ought to be.”
    3 later decisions 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.