Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 757 SO2D 423 - Brushwitz v. Ezell

Brushwitz v. Ezell’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
1
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 547 So. 2d 870 - West v. Founders Life Assur. Co. of Florida · 538 So. 2d 794 - Bass v. SOUTHTRUST BANK OF BALDWIN CTY. · Hanners v. Balfour Guthrie, Inc. · 531 So. 2d 860 - Bussey v. John Deere Co. · Foremost Ins. Co. v. Parham

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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The elements of fraud are: (1) a misrepresentation of a material fact, (2) made willfully to deceive, recklessly, without knowledge, or mistakenly, (3) that was reasonably relied on by the plaintiff under the circumstances, and (4) that caused damage as a proximate consequence.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[e]vidence supporting nothing more than speculation, conjecture, or a guess does not rise to the level of substantial evidence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"The appraiser has noted in the appraisal report any adverse conditions . . . observed during the inspection of the subject property or that he or she became aware of during the normal research involved in performing the appraisal. Unless otherwise stated in the appraisal report, the appraiser has no knowledge of any hidden or unapparent conditions of the property or adverse environmental conditions . . . that would make the property more or less valuable, and has assumed that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees or warranties, expressed or implied, regarding the condition of the property. The appraiser will not be responsible for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because the appraiser is not an expert in the field of environmental hazards, the appraisal report must not be considered as an environmental assessment of the property."”
    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.