573 So. 2d 54 - Lambert v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently December 2012
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 410 So. 2d 501 - Whitten v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co. · 530 So. 2d 456 - Schwartz v. WK PARTNERS · Castaway Lounge of Bay County, Inc. v. Reid · 440 So. 2d 28 - Stevenson v. Rutherford · 455 So. 2d 1138 - Wall v. DEPT. OF TRANSP. OF STATE OF FLA.
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.
“The court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee to be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party’s attorney in any civil action in which the court finds that there was a complete absence of a justiciable issue of either law or fact raised by the complaint ... of the losing party; ...”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he frivolousness of a claim or a defense is to be judged and determined as of the time it is initially presented, and if it can pass muster at that point, subsequent developments which render the claim or the defense to be without justiciable issue in law or fact should not subject the losing party to attorney's fees.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“as a prerequisite to an award of attorney's fees under § 57.105, the court must find `a complete absence of a justiciable issue of either law or fact raised by the losing party'.”
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.