Griefer v. DiPietro’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 2018
1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions
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 382 So. 2d 1197 - Canakaris v. Canakaris · 474 So. 2d 212 - Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co. · 443 So. 2d 944 - Mercer v. Raine · 401 So. 2d 1310 - Binger v. King Pest Control · 666 So. 2d 140 - Kordon v. Wal-Mart Stores, 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[a] trial court clearly may exercise its discretion in imposing sanctions. In this case, however, the trial court, by excluding the foregoing testimony, engaged in judicial overkill. . . . A trial court should only exclude witnesses under the most compelling of circumstances. This is particularly so when the exclusion would be of a party's most important witness."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"To strike all of the testimony was too extreme[;] . . . the trial court should have barred only the new opinions, not those opinions to which the expert had testified in deposition and were known to the appellees."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Although a trial court has broad discretion regarding the admissibility of rebuttal testimony, it abuses that discretion when it limits non-cumulative rebuttal that goes to the heart of the principal defense.”
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.