Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 952 So. 2d 151 - Johnson v. Rao

952 So. 2d 151 - Johnson v. Rao’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

14 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co. · O'CONNOR v. Abraham Altus · Direct Mail Specialists, Inc. v. Eclat Computerized Technologies, Inc. · STEEN v. Andrews · 733 So. 2d 261 - Carr v. Town of Shubuta

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.

  1. “[A] summons may be served on a person outside this state by sending a copy of the summons and of the complaint to the person to be served by certified mail, return receipt requested. Where the defendant is a natural person, the envelope containing the summons and complaint shall be marked “restricted delivery.” Service by this method shall be deemed complete as of the date of delivery as evidenced by the return receipt or by the returned envelope marked “Refused.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Determining whether there is good cause for failure to serve process is a discretionary ruling on the part of the trial court and is entitled to deferential review of whether the trial court abused its discretion and whether there was substantial evidence supporting the determination. On the other hand, determining whether there should have been an extension of time is a question of law[,] which [the appellate] [c]ourt reviews de novo.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[The receptionist] testified that she was not authorized by [the doctor] to accept service of process; that she was not aware that the papers were regarding a lawsuit against [the doctor]; that she had never accepted service of process on behalf of [the doctor] or anyone else[ ] in the past; that the deputy did not- ask to see [the doctor] and did not inform her that he was there to serve process on [the doctor].”
    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.