798 So. 2d 42 - Hoffman v. Ouellette’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 389 So. 2d 999 - Bishop v. Florida Specialty Paint Co. · 572 So. 2d 1363 - Kraemer v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. · 406 So. 2d 1109 - State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Olsen · 766 So. 2d 350 - Tune v. Philip Morris Incorporated · Martineau v. Guertin
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 rights and liabilities of the parties with respect to an issue in tort are determined by the local law of the state which, with respect to that issue, has the most significant relationship to the occurrence and the parties under the principles stated in § 6. (2) Contacts to be taken into account in applying the principles of § 6 to determine the law applicable to an issue include: (a) the place where the injury occurred, (b) the place where the conduct causing the injury occurred, (c) the domicil, residence, nationality, place of incorporation and place of business of the parties, and (d) the place where the relationship, if any, between the parties is centered. These contacts are to be evaluated according to their relative importance with respect to the particular issue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Florida courts shall be open to every person for redress of any injury. Art. 1, § 21, Fla. Const.”
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.