561 So. 2d 406 - Lashley v. Bowman’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 2016
11 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 475 So. 2d 666 - Moore v. Morris · 531 So. 2d 161 - Poore v. State · Waldon v. Covington · 541 So. 2d 1170 - Duke v. State · 382 So. 2d 150 - Food Fair, Inc. v. Anderson
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is supported by our statement in Bowman that the standard of outrageousness set out in comment d to section 46 of the Restatement is almost impossible to apply in any consistent way essentially because outrageousness is a not only highly subjective, but also an extremely mutable trait. This problem is exemplified by the high degree of inconsistency between (and within) courts about what is, at any given time or place,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“outrageousness is more likely to be found where some relationship exists that gives the defendant actual or apparent authority over another or power to affect his interests”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The cases thus far decided have found liability only where the defendant's conduct has been extreme and outrageous. It has not been enough that the defendant has acted with an intent which is tortious or even criminal, or that he has intended to inflict emotional distress, or even that his conduct has been characterized by `malice,' or a degree of aggravation which would entitle the plaintiff to punitive damages for another tort. Liability has been found only where the conduct has been so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Generally, the case is one in which the recitation of the facts to an average member of the community would arouse his resentment against the actor, and lead him to exclaim, `Outrageous!'”
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.