Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 675 SO2D 1242 - Watters v. Stripling

Watters v. Stripling’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
2
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Allred v. Moore & Peterson (1997), 731 So. 2d 1192 - Rains v. Gardner (1999)

1 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

310199620002010decided

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 Systems Signs Supplies v. United States Department of Justice · 618 So. 2d 1252 - Womble v. Singing River Hosp. · McGregor v. United States · McDonald v. United States · 606 So. 2d 1117 - Gentry v. Wallace

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

  1. “at least as much as would be required to show excusable neglect, as to which simple inadvertence or mistake of counsel or ignorance of the rules usually does not suffice.”
    20 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “If a service of the summons and complaint is not made upon a defendant within 120 days after the filing of the complaint and the party on whose behalf such service was required cannot show good cause why such service was not made within that period, the action shall be dismissed as to that defendant without prejudice upon the court's own initiative with notice to such party or upon motion.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[t]he fact that dismissal may work to preclude [an] action because of the running of the statute of limitation is of no consequence.”
    3 later decisions 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.