97 So. 2d 310 - Bailey v. Swartz’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 1985
1 federal appellate · 11 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 78 So. 2d 873 - Parker v. Brinson Construction Company · Everglade Cypress Co. v. Tunnicliffe, as Liqdr. · Sullivan v. McMillan · Shoup v. Waits · State Ex Rel. Boulevard Mortgage Co. v. Thompson
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“I beg to differ with that portion of the opinion of my colleagues modifying the judgment of the lower court so as to remove therefrom the item of interest. The interest was not included in the jury's verdict but only the debt. Interest was added by the trial judge in rendering judgment on the verdict. In so doing, the majority opinion concludes that the trial judge was in error and supports this view by the authority expressed in State ex rel. Boulevard Mortgage Co. v. Thompson, 113 Fla. 419 , 151 So. 704 . This case was decided by the Supreme Court of Florida in 1933. I have been unable to find any case in Florida since that time that has dealt directly with the point at issue here. However, in Parker v. Brinson Construction Company, Fla. 1955, 78 So.2d 873, 874 , the Supreme Court, through Justice Drew said: "The fact that there is an honest and bona-fide dispute as to whether the debt is actually due has no bearing on the question (interest). The rule is that if it is finally determined that the debt was due, the person to whom it was due is entitled not only to the payment of the principal of the debt but to interest at the lawful rate from the due date thereof. Sullivan v. McMillan, [ 37 Fla. 134 , 19 So. 340 , 53 Am.St.Rep. 239 ] supra; Everglade Cypress Co. v. Tunnicliffe, 107 Fla. 675 , 148 So. 192 ." (Emphasis supplied.) In the instant case, the appellee claimed a specific amount as damages for breach of an oral contract of employment as a real estate broker and inte”
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.