Furst v. Blackman’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 790 So. 2d 1061 - Blumberg v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co. · Chase & Co. v. Little · Williams v. State · 637 So. 2d 285 - Menke v. Southland Specialties Corp. · 706 So. 2d 47 - Gaines v. State
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“was not a sham under these standards. Although plaintiffs affidavits did not say that this was a loan, but rather referred to this as an investment, neither of the affidavits said that plaintiff was to be issued stock.... The term “investment,” used in the affidavits, is not entirely incompatible with a loan. The “investment” could have been for the purpose of earning interest from a loan or for appreciation in value of stock.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“party claiming [judicial] estoppel must have been misled and changed positions.”
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.