Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 750 So. 2d 616 - Deen v. Quantum Resources, Inc.

750 So. 2d 616 - Deen v. Quantum Resources, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
January 2014
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 72 So. 2d 285 - Jones v. Florida Power Corp. · 605 So. 2d 850 - Mandico v. Taos Const., Inc. · 287 So. 2d 56 - Conklin v. Cohen · Smith v. Ussery · 420 So. 2d 587 - Gulfstream Land & Development Corp. v. Wilkerson

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. “The liability of an employer prescribed in s. 440.10 shall be exclusive and in place of all other liability, including vicarious liability, of such employer to any third-party tortfeasor and to the employee, the legal representative thereof, husband or wife, parents, dependents, next of kin, and anyone otherwise entitled to recover damages from such employer at law or in admiralty on account of such injury or death, except as follows: (a) If an employer fails to secure payment of compensation as required by this chapter.... (b) When an employer commits an intentional tort that causes the injury or death of the employee. For purposes of this paragraph, an employer’s actions shall be deemed to constitute an intentional tort and not an accident only when the employee proves, by clear and convincing evidence, that: 1. The employer deliberately intended to injure the employee; or 2. The employer engaged in conduct that the employer knew, based on prior similar accidents or on explicit warnings specifically identifying a known danger, was virtually certain to result in injury or death to the employee, and the employee was not aware of the risk because the danger was not apparent and the employer deliberately concealed or misrepresented the danger so as to prevent the employee from exercising informed judgment about whether to perform the work. The same immunities from liability enjoyed by an employer shall extend as well to each employee of the employer when such employee is acting”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “Every employer coming within the provisions of this chapter shall be liable for, and shall secure, the payment to his or her employees ... of the compensation payable under ss. 440.13, 440.15, and 440.16. Any contractor or subcontractor who engages in any public or private construction in the state shall secure and maintain compensation for his or her employees under this chapter as provided in s. 440.38.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “and of the landowner are independent of one another and do not interact in any manner. The alleged acts of negligence for which FP & L is being sued here are in its capacity as the landowner and are not affected by its”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.