62 So. 2d 904 - Weiss v. Jacobson’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably 474 So. 2d 239 - Jaar v. University of Miami (1985), 679 So. 2d 729 - McGhee v. Volusia County (1996)
3 federal appellate · 31 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 R. L. Stinson & East Coast Lumber Co. v. Prevatt · Orr v. Avon Florida Citrus Corp. · International Shoe Co. v. Hewitt · Smothers v. Welch & Co. House Furnishing Co.
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'although the scope of employment is considerably broader than explicitly authorized acts of the employee, it does not extend to cases in which the servant has stepped aside from his employment to commit a tort which the master neither directed in fact, nor could be supposed, from the nature of his employment, to have authorized or expected the servant to do’”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““As a general rule under the principles of the common law an employer is liable in damages for the wrongful act of his employee that causes injury to another person, if the wrongful act is done while the employee is acting within the apparent scope of his authority as such employee to serve the interests of the employer, even though the wrongful act also constitutes a crime not a homicide or was not authorized by, or was forbidden by, the employer, or was not necessary or appropriate to serve the interests of the employer, unless the wrongful act of the employee was done to accomplish his own purposes, and not to serve the interests of the employer.” 84 Fla. at 418-419 , 94 So. at 657 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“true criterion is whether that which the clerk did was something her employment contemplated”
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.