State v. Cuda’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Keyes v. Huckleberry House · 590 So. 2d 404 - Schmitt v. State · Locklin v. Pridgeon · 137 So. 2d 828 - Cramp v. BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF ORANGE · 562 So. 2d 687 - Waldrup v. Dugger
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“one who commits a criminal act involving use or management of an aged person's funds with the purpose of profiting from the illegality is sufficiently put on notice that such conduct is proscribed by the statute in issue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cuda v. State“as an act that subjects one to criminal penalties. Using that definition, the Fifth District Court of Appeal held that”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cuda v. State“a sufficiently definite warning of the proscribed conduct,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cuda v. State
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.