Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 773 SO2D 240 - Sciortino v. Sciortino

Sciortino v. Sciortino’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 617 So. 2d 880 - Stobart v. State Through DOTD · 389 So. 2d 381 - Adams v. Adams · 711 So. 2d 780 - Robling v. Allstate Ins. Co. · 559 So. 2d 1379 - Wheelahan v. Wheelahan · 607 So. 2d 823 - Baxter v. Baxter

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

  1. “[i]f a litigant cannot fully understand or read and write the English language, he is entitled to an interpreter.” . When a party appears to have a limited ability to communicate in English, the court should conduct a brief voir dire to determine the extent of the disability. Such a voir dire should avoid questions that can be appropriately answered with “yes” or”
    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.