Curry v. Turner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 state decisions

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

1. “Betty Curry is not only the wife of the deceased, she is his personal representative as administratrix of his estate. The style of this case indicates it was her intention to bring this suit on behalf of all his wrongful death beneficiaries. The original and proposed amended complaint seek damages for all beneficiaries and not just for herself. The facts of Arender are closer to the facts in the instant case than those in Thiroux . We therefore conclude that the trial court's ruling that she represented the interests of their minor children, as the estate's administratrix and as their mother, for purposes of counting the statute of limitations against them, is affirmed. While this is a difficult conclusion, we are convinced the provisions in the wrongful death statute and the minors savings statute are at irreconcilable odds with one another where there exists a person qualified under the wrongful death statute to bring suit. This conclusion is reinforced by the wrongful death statute's requirement that one suit be brought for damages from wrongful death. A common sense reading of the wrongful death statute indicates the statute of limitations runs against both the personal representative of the deceased and the deceased's children. Since the amended complaint was filed after the statute of limitations had run, the children's claims, like the estate's and their mother's, are barred by the statute of limitations.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 913 So. 2d 394 - Anderson v. R & D FOODS, INC. · 859 So. 2d 981 - Lee v. Thompson

2. “If any person entitled to bring any of the personal actions mentioned shall, at the time at which the cause of action accrued, be under the disability of infancy or unsoundness of mind, he may bring the actions within the times in this chapter respectively limited, after his disability shall be removed as provided by law.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 913 So. 2d 394 - Anderson v. R & D FOODS, INC. · 565 F. Supp. 2d 699 - Johnson v. Med Express Ambulance Service, Inc.

3. “by leave of court or upon written consent of the adverse party; leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 929 So. 2d 315 - Wilner v. White · 926 So. 2d 890 - Ralph Walker, Inc. v. Gallagher