551 So. 2d 1244 - Pic N' Save v. Singleton’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 450 So. 2d 858 - Coralluzzo by and Through Coralluzzo v. Fass · Grochowski v. Palm Beach County Ass'n for Retarded Children · 414 So. 2d 602 - Walt Disney World Co. v. Schiebel · 468 So. 2d 237 - Tootle v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad · 495 So. 2d 890 - Hernandez v. State
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There is no issue as to compliance with this statute [section 440.13(2)(b)] in the present case, and there is no other provision in chapter 440 by which employer/carrier's desired oral communication might be compelled. While prior authorities indicate that a patient generally could not judicially preclude such communication, see generally Coralluzzo v. Fass, 450 So.2d 858 (Fla. 1984), section 455.241(2), Florida Statutes (1988 Supp.), now establishes that: ... the medical condition of a patient may not be discussed with, any person other than the patient or his legal representative or other health care providers involved in the care or treatment of the patient, except upon written authorization of the patient. ... And neither a general waiver of confidentiality by putting a matter in issue, as in Tootle v. Seaboard Coastline Railroad Co., 468 So.2d 237 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), nor compelled production of pertinent, medical reports and records in workers' compensation cases, as in Kirk v. Publix Super Markets, 185 So.2d 161 (Fla. 1966), overcomes the more specific proscription against unauthorized communication as reflected in section 455.241(2). ... . As in Campbell v. Wendy's of South Florida, 495 So.2d 890 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), where this court concluded that an employer/carrier's request for release of medical records should be pursued through ordinary discovery procedures rather than upon a motion to compel before the judge of compensation claims, the administrative convenienc”
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.