Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 91 Fla. 260 - Warner v. Goding

Warner v. Goding’s Empirical Analysis

1926

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
3
states following
December 1981
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently December 1981 · most notably 359 So. 2d 430 - Wackenhut Corp. v. Canty (1978), Lynch v. Walker (1947)

6 federal appellate · 50 state decisions

1701926193019401950196019701980decided

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 Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Anderson · Garner v. State · Anderson v. Southern Cotton Oil Co. · Ruff v. Georgia, Southern & Florida Railway Co. · Bishop v. Taylor

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

  1. “It is in the discretion of the court in some cases to grant a new trial, and this must be a judicial and not an arbitrary discretion; and it is frequent in our books for the court to take notice of miscarriages of juries, and to grant new trials upon them. And it is for the people's benefit that it should be so, for a jury may sometimes, by indirect dealings, be moved to side with one party, and not to be indifferent betwixt them; but it cannot be so intended of the court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““In this state of the evidence the injury to defendant in error could not be said to have been caused by the servant of plaintiffs in error when acting within the scope of his employment, but was caused at a time when the servant was engaged in an act beyond the scope of his employment and without the knowledge, acquiescence or consent of the master either express or implied. The master is not therefore liable. . . .””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “been so violated as to make it reasonably clear that a fair trial was not had,”
    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.