93 So. 2d 584 - Dennis v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently March 2012
18 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 75 So. 2d 758 - Ball v. Mann · 44 Cal. 2d 364 - Smith v. Industrial Accident Commission · O'Brien v. Albert A. Albrecht Co. · 9 Wash. 2d 1 - Harrington v. Department of Labor & Industries · Asplund Construction Co. v. State Industrial Commission
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Due to the impossibility or impracticality of providing for every conceivable factual situation, application of the statute to achieve a known purpose of legislation may sometimes create a technical inconsistency. We feel that workmen's compensation acts were designed to remove from the workmen himself the burden of his own injury and disability and place it on the industry which he served. Such acts should be liberally construed with the interest of the working man foremost." Dennis v. Brown, 93 So.2d 584 (Fla. 1957).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"The capacities of a human being cannot be arbitrarily and finally divided and written off by percentages. The fact that a man has once received compensation as for 50% of total disability does not mean that ever after he is in the eyes of compensation law but half a man, so that he can never again receive a compensation award going beyond the other 50% of total. After having received his prior payments, he may, in future years, be able to resume gainful employment. If so, there is no reason why a disability which would bring anyone else total permanent disability benefits should yield him only half as much."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“in excess of the compensation allowed for such injury when considered by itself and not in conjunction with the previous disability.”
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.