Schwartz v. Schwartz’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 382 So. 2d 1197 - Canakaris v. Canakaris · 472 So. 2d 1145 - Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe · 696 So. 2d 697 - Rosen v. Rosen · 903 So. 2d 928 - Wade v. Hirschman · 827 So. 2d 1079 - Sumlar v. Sumlar
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the issues, and the legal skill required; (2) the likelihood that the representation will preclude other employment by the lawyer; (3) the customary fee; (4) the result obtained; (5) the time limitations imposed by the client or circumstances; (6) the nature and length of the professional relationship with the client; (7) the experience, reputation and ability of the lawyers; and (8) whether the fee is fixed or contingent.”
2 later decisions 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.