Fitzgerald v. Molle-Teeters’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently March 2013
19 state decisions
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 359 So. 2d 430 - Wackenhut Corp. v. Canty · Radiant Oil Co. v. Herring · 159 So. 2d 641 - Shaw v. Puleo · Laskey v. Smith · 401 So. 2d 1341 - Ford Motor Co. v. Kikis
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f reasonable men could differ as to the propriety of the action taken by the trial court, then the action is not unreasonable and there can be no finding of an abuse of discretion.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“substantial conflicting expert medical opinion concerning the cause of medical problems”
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.