776 So. 2d 262 - Pinellas County v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Airwick Industries, Inc. v. Carlstadt Sewerage Authority · 595 So. 2d 25 - City of Boca Raton v. State · State v. City of Miami · 667 So. 2d 180 - Sarasota County v. Sarasota Church of Christ · 650 So. 2d 1 - State v. City of Port Orange
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“where a governmental entity provides access to traditional utility services, this Court has not hesitated to uphold local ordinances imposing mandatory fees, regardless of whether an individual customer actually uses or desires the service.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the County, which was authorized by its home rule charter powers and the Special Acts to add reclaimed water improvements to its existing water and sewer system, was not required to comply with additional requirements of chapter 153, Florida Statutes, where it neither relied, nor was required to rely, upon such supplemental authority.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“§ 403.031(17), Fla. Stat. (1997) (providing that storm water management programs are to be operated `as a typical utility which bills services regularly, similar to water and wastewater services')”
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.