638 So. 2d 1295 - Shipley v. Ferguson’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably 666 So. 2d 493 - Varner v. Varner (1995), 708 So. 2d 44 - Par Industries, Inc. v. Target Container Co. (1998)
39 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 418 So. 2d 764 - McKee v. McKee · 437 So. 2d 410 - Tedford v. Dempsey · 564 So. 2d 839 - Cumberland v. Cumberland · 490 So. 2d 866 - Cox v. Moulds · 566 So. 2d 704 - Martin v. Martin
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) Amendment to Conform to the Evidence. When issues not raised by the pleadings are tried by expressed or implied consent of the parties, they shall be treated in all respects as if they had been raised in the pleadings. Such amendment of the pleadings as may be necessary to cause them to conform to the evidence and to raise these issues may be made upon motion of any party at any time, even after judgment; but failure so to amend does not affect the result of the trial of these issues. If evidence is objected to at the trial on the ground that it is not within the issues made by the pleadings, the court may allow the pleadings to be amended and shall do so freely when the presentation of the merits of the action will be subserved thereby and the objecting party fails to satisfy the court that the admission of such evidence would prejudice him in the maintaining of his action or defense upon the merits. The court may grant a continuance to enable the objecting party to meet such evidence. The court is to be liberal in granting permission to amend when justice so requires.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“only [material] changes occurring after the original decree and not reasonable[reasonably] anticipated by the parties at the time of the agreement should be considered in the modification of child support.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“reasonably anticipated by the parties to the agreement at the time of the agreement,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Barfield v. State · Lack v. Nash
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.