Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 555 So. 2d 685 - Cunningham v. Lanier

555 So. 2d 685 - Cunningham v. Lanier’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
September 2016
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently September 2016

13 state decisions

1001989199020002010decided

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 444 So. 2d 358 - Brown v. Credit Center, Inc. · Keiser v. Coliseum Properties, Inc. · 481 So. 2d 247 - Shaw v. Burchfield · 457 So. 2d 941 - Dennis v. Searle · Winfield Associates, Inc. v. Stonecipher

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

  1. “Justice is served when a fair opportunity to oppose a motion is provided — because consideration of a motion for summary judgment requires a careful review by the trial court of all pertinent evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmovant.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such motion by Rule 56.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “ALIMONY Douglas C. Lanier, Jr. agrees to pay Deborah Lanier periodic alimony in the sum of $2,500.00 per month for a period of ten (10) years beginning October 1, 1985. It is understood between the parties that said alimony payments for tax purposes shall be a deduction for Douglas C. Lanier, Jr., and income for Deborah Lanier.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.