Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 474 So. 2d 861 - Barruzza v. Suddath Van Lines, Inc.

474 So. 2d 861 - Barruzza v. Suddath Van Lines, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently January 2017

9 state decisions

301985199020002010decided

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

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 424

Relies on International Longshoremen's Ass'n v. Allied International, Inc. · 392 So. 2d 263 - Briggs v. Salcines · 425 So. 2d 534 - Citizens of State v. PUBLIC SERVICE COM'N · 393 So. 2d 1063 - American Bankers Ins. Co. v. Little · 334 So. 2d 626 - Englewood Water District v. Tate

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

  1. “in those instances `where the language of a statute clearly limits the application to a particular class of cases, leaving no room for doubts as to the meaning of the legislature, the statute may not be enlarged or expanded to cover cases not falling within its provisions.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The starting point in statutory analysis is, of course, the language of the statute. Where the language used by the legislature makes clear the legislative intent, it is incumbent upon the courts to give effect to that intent.”
    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.