Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1903–1987 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Gentile Bros. v. Florida Industrial Commissiongreen2 sentences1979Comm’n, 151 Fla. 857, 862 , 10 So.2d 568, 571 (1942): It may be that such an interpretation will work a hardship in this case but individual cases should not be permitted to overthrow a long settled rule that the public has relied on and in a multitude of instances would be adversely affected by it if overthrown. 1979Comm’n, 151 Fla. 857, 862 , 10 So.2d 568, 571 (1942): It may be that such an interpretation will work a hardship in this case but individual cases should not be permitted to overthrow a long settled rule that the public has relied on and in a multitude of instances would be adversely affected by it if overthrown. | 2 | 2 |
Bond v. Hewittgreen1 sentence1987Our conclusion here may appear to be harsh, but we have no alternative because “if the rule were otherwise, the obvious result would be to abrogate the long settled rule respecting the finality of written contracts.” Id. at 608. | 1 | 1 |
Matera v. Stategreen1 sentence1974See Matera v. State, Fla.App.3d, 218 So.2d 180 , cert. den. 396 U.S. 955 , 90 S.Ct. 424 , 24 L.Ed.2d 420 ; Ward v. State, 82 Fla. 383 , 90 So. 157 . | 1 | 1 |
Southern California Edison Co. v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1974See Matera v. State, Fla.App.3d, 218 So.2d 180 , cert. den. 396 U.S. 955 , 90 S.Ct. 424 , 24 L.Ed.2d 420 ; Ward v. State, 82 Fla. 383 , 90 So. 157 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ward v. State
neutral
2 sentences1974See Matera v. State, Fla.App.3d, 218 So.2d 180 , cert. den. 396 U.S. 955 , 90 S.Ct. 424 , 24 L.Ed.2d 420 ; Ward v. State, 82 Fla. 383 , 90 So. 157 . 1974See Matera v. State, Fla.App.3d, 218 So.2d 180 , cert. den. 396 U.S. 955 , 90 S.Ct. 424 , 24 L.Ed.2d 420 ; Ward v. State, 82 Fla. 383 , 90 So. 157 . | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Canizares v. Encore, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence1970E. g., Canizares v. Encore, Fla.App.1966, 192 So.2d 790 . | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Coker v. Hayes
green
2 sentences1903Coker v. Hayes, 16 Fla. 368 ; Godwin v. Bryan, Ibid. 396 ; Story v. State, Ibid. 564; Meinhard Bros. & Co. v. Lilienthal, 17 Fla. 501 ; Southern Exp. 1903Coker v. Hayes, 16 Fla. 368 ; Godwin v. Bryan, Ibid. 396 ; Story v. State, Ibid. 564; Meinhard Bros. & Co. v. Lilienthal, 17 Fla. 501 ; Southern Exp. | 1 | 1903–1903 |
Meinhard, Bros. v. Lilienthal
neutral
1 sentence1903Coker v. Hayes, 16 Fla. 368 ; Godwin v. Bryan, Ibid. 396 ; Story v. State, Ibid. 564; Meinhard Bros. & Co. v. Lilienthal, 17 Fla. 501 ; Southern Exp. | 1 | 1903–1903 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.