Peterson v. Asklipious’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Pollard v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. · Pollard v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. · 565 So. 2d 1332 - MacKenzie v. Super Kids Bargain Store, Inc. · 400 So. 2d 553 - Hayslip v. Douglas · 773 So. 2d 7 - Armstrong v. Harris
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A motion to disqualify shall show ... that the party fears that he or she will not receive a fair trial or hearing because of specifically described prejudice or bias of the judge....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“THE COURT: So he’s going to tell me one more time he has no money when I haven’t believed him anytime before that? [PETERSON’S] COUNSEL: Well, he’s entitled. It’s not a matter of what you believe, it’s a matter of ... THE COURT: Unfortunately, I already made those findings, and I don’t need his testimony. [PETERSON’S] COUNSEL: It’s a matter of the evidence, Your Honor. THE COURT: Motion for contempt is granted.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.