90 So. 2d 351 - Ferrantelli v. Sanchez’s Empirical Analysis
1956
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently September 1993
2 federal appellate · 14 state decisions
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 United States v. Lushbough · Automotive Finance Co. v. Daigle · 85 So. 2d 321 - Motors Securities Company v. Hines
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The errors specified by Hartford are: "(1) Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company contends that the Lower Court erred in rendering a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against it, when Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company was not a defendant in the law suit, but was only a third-party defendant. "(2) Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company further contends that, at the time of the accident in question, Jerry L. Dennis was not acting within the course and scope of his employment so as to render his employer, Chartres Corporation, and thereby its liability insurer, Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company, liable to plaintiff, Ruth Heckel, for the damages sustained in the accident in question." The errors specified by Ruth Heckel are: "(1) The trial court erred in failing to render judgment against Jerry L. Dennis, the defendant responsible for the collision. "(2) The trial court erred in failing to award adequate damages to plaintiff for the injuries sustained."”
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.