Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 84 SO2D 21 - Advertects, Inc. v. Sawyer Industries

Advertects, Inc. v. Sawyer Industries’s Empirical Analysis

1955

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
2
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 37 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably 450 So. 2d 1114 - Dania Jai-Alai Palace, Inc. v. Sykes (1984), U-Haul International, Inc. v. Jartran, Inc. (1986)

6 federal appellate · 37 state decisions

1501955196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on 45 So. 2d 119 - Miami Coca Cola Bottling Co. v. Mahlo · 47 So. 2d 769 - Riley v. Fatt · 53 So. 2d 658 - Gustafson v. City of Ocala · Advertects, Inc. v. Sawyer Industries, Inc.

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

  1. “'The corporate veil will not be penetrated ... unless it is shown that the corporation was organized or employed to mislead creditors or to work a fraud upon them.'”
    22 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “are intended to afford to a judgment creditor the most complete relief possible in satisfying his judgment”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “that the stockholders had improperly converted ... its property to their own use or ... fraudulently or inequitably abused their relationship with the corporate entity.”
    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.