Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 708 SO2D 531 - Taylor v. Burton

Taylor v. Burton’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

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

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently June 2015

9 state decisions

40199820002010decided

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 549 So. 2d 840 - Rosell v. Esco · 507 So. 2d 825 - Virgil v. American Guar. & Liability Ins. · Dixie Campers, Inc. v. Vesely Co. · McCarroll v. McCarroll · 595 So. 2d 1123 - Young v. Ford Motor Co., Inc.

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. “Damages for a nonpecuniary loss may be recovered when the contract, because of its nature, is intended to gratify a nonpecuniary interest and, because of the circumstances surrounding the formation or the nonperformance of the contract, the obligor knew, or should have known, that his failure to perform would cause that kind of loss. Regardless of the nature of the contract, these damages may be recovered also when the obligor intended, through his failure, to aggrieve the feelings of the obligee.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Both Ken and Penny Taylor testified that this was the first house the couple had built. They stated that the house in which they had been living was cramped, and they had been looking forward to entertaining family and friends in their new house. They further stated that their children were also looking forward to having get-togethers at the new house with their friends. The Taylors also testified that because of the obvious defects they were embarrassed to have friends over. Penny Taylor stated that the day the garage ceiling sagged, a scheduled family function had to be canceled because they were afraid of possible danger to family members.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[i]nterpretation of a contract is the determination of the common intent of the parties.”
    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.