610 So. 2d 1264 - Holder v. Keller Kitchen Cabinets’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 2021
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 Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Lambert · 587 So. 2d 1323 - Roe v. CITY INVESTING/GENERAL DEV. CORP. · Bowen v. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation · 88 So. 2d 120 - Walter Denson & Son v. Nelson · McClain 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Section 440.28 merely serves to allow modification, upon specified conditions, of compensation orders which would otherwise bar subsequent claims for workers’ compensation benefits under principles of res judicata, estoppel by judgment, or law of the case. Therefore, the existence of the requisites for application of one of these doctrines must be present before it becomes necessary for a claimant to resort to Section 440.28 for relief. The determination of whether such requisites are present necessarily turns upon the facts and circumstances presented in each case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Modification is not required because a premature compensation claim, not ripe for adjudication, does not meet the required elements of identity in the thing sued for or identity of the cause of action necessary for application of the doctrine of res judica-ta. (Citations omitted). Likewise the doctrines of estoppel by judgment and law of the case have no application to a compensation claim that was premature at the time of the prior proceedings and therefore was not adjudicated.”
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.