Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 632 SO2D 146 - Easkold v. Rhodes

Easkold v. Rhodes’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 2002
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 520 So. 2d 582 - King v. State · 614 So. 2d 495 - Easkold v. Rhodes · 467 So. 2d 465 - Smith v. Dunning · 619 So. 2d 324 - Fischbach & Moore, Inc. v. McBro · 588 So. 2d 267 - Rhodes v. Easkold

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The next question is when the interest started running. The trial court held that the interest runs from the date of the jury verdict. This was error. Post-judgment interest begins to run when the judgment has been filed with the clerk of the court. See, e.g., Allstate Ins. Co. v. Powell, 513 So.2d 802 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), review denied mem., 520 So.2d 585 (Fla.1988). Appellant's argument that this rule does not pertain in cases decided by jury is not persuasive. See, e.g., Smith v. Dunning, 467 So.2d 465 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (holding that interest cannot be allowed before entry of judgment in a tort case decided by jury).”
    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.