Schmidt v. Doe’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Moak v. American Automobile Insurance Company · 508 So. 2d 1356 - Rivett v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. · 453 So. 2d 232 - Audubon Ins. Co. v. Farr · Mooneyhan v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co.
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The party urging an exception of res judicata based on a compromise has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the elements of the compromise, including the parties' intention to compromise their differences. An endorsed draft can satisfy the requirements of a written compromise, even without the formal release language. It is, nonetheless, up to the insurer to make clear and unequivocal the parties' mutual intention to compromise. Parol evidence is admissible to show error which may be the basis of rescinding a compromise.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Murphy v. Hoffpauir“can not be attacked on account of any error in law or any lesion.”
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.