832 So. 2d 708 - Davis v. Monahan’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 22 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 707 So. 2d 1119 - Federal Ins. v. SOUTHWEST FLORIDA · 767 So. 2d 1179 - Hearndon v. Graham · 641 So. 2d 445 - Halkey-Roberts Corp. v. MacKal · 758 So. 2d 86 - Amendment to Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.490 · 793 So. 2d 1127 - YUSUF MOHAMAD EXCAV. INC. v. Ringhaver Equip. Co.
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Actions other than for recovery of real property shall be commenced as follows: . . . . (4) WITHIN TWO YEARS. (a) An action for professional malpractice, other than medical malpractice, whether founded on contract or tort: provided that the period of limitations shall run from the time the cause of action is discovered or should have been discovered with the exercise of due diligence. However, the limitation of actions herein for professional malpractice shall be limited to persons in privity with the professional. (b) An action for medical malpractice shall be commenced within 2 years from the time the incident giving rise to the action occurred or within 2 years from the time the incident is discovered, or should have been discovered with the exercise of due diligence .... . . . . (7) FOR INTENTIONAL TORTS BASED ON ABUSE.An action founded on alleged abuse, as defined in s. 39.01, s. 415.102, or s. 984.03, or incest, as defined in s. 826.04, may be commenced at any time within 7 years after the age of majority, or within 4 years after the injured person leaves the dependency of the abuser, or within 4 years from the time of discovery by the injured party of both the injury and the causal relationship between the injury and the abuse, whichever occurs later. (Emphasis added.) Aside from the provisions above for the delayed accrual of a cause of action in cases of fraud, products liability, professional and medical malpractice, and intentional torts based on abuse, there is ”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[In reaching its decision in Yusuf ], the Fifth District followed the Second District's decision in Halkey-Roberts Corp. v. Mackal, 641 So.2d 445 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). In Halkey-Roberts, the Second District considered section 95.031, and held that the delayed discovery rule could not operate to delay the accrual of a cause of action for the intentional tort of breach of fiduciary duty because this cause of action is not specified in the statute. We find the Fifth District's rationale to be the better view. To hold otherwise would result in this Court rewriting the statute, and, in fact, obliterating the statute.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a] cause of action accrues when the last element constituting the cause of action occurs.”
3 later decisions 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.