Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 644 So. 2d 1383 - Rease v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.

644 So. 2d 1383 - Rease v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently October 2015

9 state decisions

50199420002010decided

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 504 So. 2d 763 - Manatee County v. Marks · 587 So. 2d 455 - Gormley v. GTE Products Corp. · 498 So. 2d 859 - American Cyanamid Co. v. Roy · 277 So. 2d 848 - Cook v. Eney · 572 So. 2d 902 - Scott v. Otis Elevator 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[e]vidence of an offer to compromise a claim which was disputed as to validity or amount ... is inadmissible to prove liability or absence of liability for the claim or its value.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “As a rule of evidence, [the collateral source rule] “prohibits the introduction of any evidence of payments from collateral sources, upon proper objection.” [Gormley, 587 So.2d] at 457. This is so because the introduction of collateral source evidence “misleads the jury on the issue of liability and, thus, subverts the jury process.” Id. at 458.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “to avert any possible misunderstanding on the jury's part.”
    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.