green
Positive treatment
5.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1933 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1933
1979
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Davis v. Starling
See Allie v. Ionata, 503 So.2d 1237, 1239 (Fla.1987) (defense of recoupment available even though underlying claim barred by applicable statute of limitations as independent cause of action); and Payne v. Nicholson, 100 Fla. 1459, 1464 , 131 So. 324, 326 (1930) (defense of limitations is not available against cause of action in recoupment, even though such claim as independent cause of action would be barred).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re W.G. Wade Shows, Inc.
Kaufman Inc., 145 Fla. 152 , 198 So. 794 (1940); Payne v. Nicholson, 100 Fla. 1459 , 131 So. 324, 326 (1930) (one may raise as a defense a claim otherwise barred).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Allie v. Ionata
Payne v. Nicholson, 100 Fla. 1459 , 131 So. 324, 326 (1930).
discussed
Cited "see"
Allie v. Ionata
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See, Payne v. Nicholson, 1930, 100 Fla. 1459 , 131 So. 324 .
cited
Cited "see"
Cherney v. Moody
See Payne v. Nicholson, 100 Fla. 1459 , 131 So. 324, 326 (Fla. 1930).
cited
Cited "see"
Horace Mann Insurance Company v. DeMirza
See, Payne v. Nicholson, 1930, 100 Fla. 1459 , 131 So. 324 .
cited
Cited "see"
Tampa Leather Co., Inc. v. Smith
See Payne v. Nicholson, 100 Fla. 1459 , 131 So. 324 ; Lang v. Quaker Realty Corp., 131 Fla. 179 , 179 So. 144 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Grossman v. BANCO INDUS. DE VENEZUELA
Compare Payne v. Nicholson, 100 Fla. 1459 , 131 So. 324 (1930) (collateral fraudulent promise may be relied upon).
First National Bank of Miami, Florida, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
E. W. Bebinger, Defendant in Error
v.
E. W. Bebinger, Defendant in Error
Supreme Court of Florida.
Dec 10, 1930.
Lilburn R. Railey and Jordan Gardner, for Plaintiff in Error;
Shutts Bowen, Herbert S. Sawyer and Joseph F. McPherson,
for Defendant in Error.
Whitfield, Strum, Buford.
Published
Per Curiam.
This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and t'he record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises,, it seems to the Court that there is no error in t'he said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the circuit court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.
Whitfield, P. J., and Strum: and Buford, J. J., concur.