Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 552 So. 2d 1113 - Angrand v. Fox

552 So. 2d 1113 - Angrand v. Fox’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably 790 So. 2d 1061 - Blumberg v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co. (2001), Silva v. Southwest Florida Blood Bank, Inc. (1992)

27 state decisions

1101989199020002010decided

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 Woods v. Interstate Realty Co. · 534 So. 2d 393 - State v. Pennington · Harris v. State · Williams v. State · Hughes v. Reed

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

  1. “is an abatement or stay of the claim for the period necessary for its maturation under the law.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[i]t is well established that a limitations defense is not favored[,] and that therefore, any substantial doubt on the question should be resolved by choosing the longer rather than the shorter possible statutory period.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(2) Upon petition to the clerk of the court where the suit will be filed and payment to the clerk of a filing fee, not to exceed $25, established by the chief judge, an automatic 90-day extension of the statute of limitations shall be granted to allow the reasonable investigation required by subsection (1). This period shall be in addition to other tolling periods. No court order is required for the extension to be effective. The provisions of this subsection shall not be deemed to revive a cause of action on which the statute of limitations has run.”
    2 later decisions 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.