Moore v. Jacobs’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
25 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Sakraida v. Ag Pro, Inc. · 451 So. 2d 219 - Stringfellow v. Stringfellow · Batts v. Tow-Motor Forklift Co. · 493 So. 2d 933 - Bryant, Inc. v. Walters · Government Financial Services One Limited Partnership v. Peyton Place Inc I-10
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the evidence was discovered following the trial; (2) due diligence on the part of the movant to discover the new evidence is shown or may be inferred; (3) the evidence is not merely cumulative or impeaching; (4) the evidence is material; (5) the evidence is such that a new trial would probably produce a new result.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“any other reason justifying relief from the judgment.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“[w]hen ruling upon Rule 60(b) motions,... a balance must be struck between granting a litigant a hearing on the merits with the need and desire to achieve finality in litigation.... [A] party is not entitled to relief merely because he is unhappy with the judgment, but he must make some showing that he was justified in failing to avoid mistake or inadvertence; gross negligence, ignorance of the rules, or ignorance of the law is not enough.”
3 later decisions 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.