Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 479 So. 2d 800 - Appel v. Scott

479 So. 2d 800 - Appel v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
September 2013
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 2013

12 state decisions

501985199020002010decided

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 The Florida Bar v. Jameison · 207 So. 2d 73 - Butts v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. · Bell v. Associated Independents, Inc. · Platt v. General Development Corporation · 177 So. 2d 523 - Miller v. Eatmon

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. “In order to invoke jurisdiction under the Declaratory Judgment Act, the complaint must show that there is a bona fide, actual, present and practical need for the declaration; that the declaration will deal with present, ascertained or ascertainable state of facts, or present controversy as to a state of facts; that some immunity, power, privilege or right is dependent upon facts or law applicable to facts; that there is some person or persons who have, or reasonably may have, an actual, present, adverse and antagonistic interest in the subject matter, either in fact or law; that the antagonistic and adverse interests are all before the court; and that the relief sought is not merely the giving of legal advice by the courts or the answers to questions propounded from curiosity.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “in excess of the rental value of the property ... not founded upon any legitimate financial basis ... arbitrary, capricious, and confiscatory ... [and] grossly excessive when compared with rents charged by similarly situated mobile home parks in the county.”
    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.