689 So. 2d 464 - Rose v. Martco, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
June 1999
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Naquin v. Uniroyal, Inc. · 640 So. 2d 788 - Fusilier v. Slick Const. Co. · 654 So. 2d 371 - Hood v. CJ Rogers, Inc. · Williams v. Fischer
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.
“F. Failure to provide payment in accordance with this Section shall result in the assessment of a penalty in an amount equal to twelve percent of any unpaid compensation or medical benefits or fifty dollars per calendar day, whichever is greater, for each day in which any and all compensation or medical benefits remain unpaid, together with reasonable attorney fees for each disputed claim; however, the fifty dollars per calendar day penalty shall not exceed a maximum of two thousand dollars in the aggregate for any claim.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In this instance, the officer’s method for arriving at her $1,000.00 penalty figure conspicuously defies and is clearly inconsistent with the plain method set forth in Section 1201(f). Accordingly, we grant the relief Rose seeks upon this portion of his second error assignment. Martco is hereby ordered to pay Rose a $2,000.00 penalty plus legal interest thereupon from the date of judicial demand until paid.”
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.