Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 691 SO2D 1129 - Yount v. Varnes

Yount v. Varnes’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
April 2013
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 119 So. 2d 712 - Brown v. Ripley · 187 So. 2d 65 - Biddle v. State Beverage Department · Johnson v. State

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. “Neither party has cited, and our independent research does not reveal, a case from Florida or any other jurisdiction which would give a court discretion to refuse payment of a judgment under these circumstances. Nor have we found anything in our statutes or rules pertaining to guardianships which would authorize a court to refuse payment of a judgment. Although our legal system has built-in protections for infants, as well as persons with other types of disabilities, in order to insulate them from having to suffer the consequences of some types of conduct, we cannot find any which would allow courts to discriminate as to which judgments should be paid. [[Image here]] The statute did require counsel to inform clients of its provisions in writing, before initiating malpractice actions. The lawsuit in this case was brought by [the minor’s] father, as her natural guardian, and presumably his decision to proceed was an informed one. Although we do not relish having to impose this burden on [the minor], we cannot ignore the fact that if she had prevailed in the malpractice action she would have recovered prevailing party attorney’s fees under the statute. Neither can we cast aside the rights of [the physician].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Independent of statute or rule a court of chancery has inherent jurisdiction and right to control and protect infants and their property, and enjoys a broad discretion in making orders protecting their welfare.”
    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.