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.
5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2003 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 |
|---|---|---|
Shimek v. Stategreen1 sentence1993See also Shimek v. State, 610 So.2d 632 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Lucas
green
2 sentences2003In State v. Lucas, 600 So.2d 1093 (Fla.1992), we determined that predicate acts involving a series of fraudulent investment-related activities met the continuity requirement of the pattern of racketeering element when those acts were perpetrated over a six-month period. 1993In State v. Lucas, 600 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 1992), the supreme court reaffirmed its earlier holding in Bowden v. State, 402 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 1981), that the "pattern of racketeering activity" element of Florida's RICO Act includes a "continuity" requirement, and the court approved the concepts expressed by the United States Supreme Court in H.J., Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 , 109 S.Ct. 2893 , 106 L.Ed.2d 195 (1989), concerning the continuity requirement and the proof necessary to establish it. | 3 | 1992–2003 |
H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.
green
2 sentences1993In State v. Lucas, 600 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 1992), the supreme court reaffirmed its earlier holding in Bowden v. State, 402 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 1981), that the "pattern of racketeering activity" element of Florida's RICO Act includes a "continuity" requirement, and the court approved the concepts expressed by the United States Supreme Court in H.J., Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 , 109 S.Ct. 2893 , 106 L.Ed.2d 195 (1989), concerning the continuity requirement and the proof necessary to establish it. 1993In State v. Lucas, 600 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 1992), the supreme court reaffirmed its earlier holding in Bowden v. State, 402 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 1981), that the "pattern of racketeering activity" element of Florida's RICO Act includes a "continuity" requirement, and the court approved the concepts expressed by the United States Supreme Court in H.J., Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 , 109 S.Ct. 2893 , 106 L.Ed.2d 195 (1989), concerning the continuity requirement and the proof necessary to establish it. | 2 | 1992–1993 |
Bowden v. State
green
1 sentence1993In State v. Lucas, 600 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 1992), the supreme court reaffirmed its earlier holding in Bowden v. State, 402 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 1981), that the "pattern of racketeering activity" element of Florida's RICO Act includes a "continuity" requirement, and the court approved the concepts expressed by the United States Supreme Court in H.J., Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 , 109 S.Ct. 2893 , 106 L.Ed.2d 195 (1989), concerning the continuity requirement and the proof necessary to establish it. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
State v. Lucas
neutral
1 sentence1992We review State v. Lucas, 570 So.2d 952 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), in which the court certified that the decision involved a question of great public importance as to the applicability and scope of the continuity requirement in a prosecution under the Florida Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO). [*] We have jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Turner v. Bituminous Casualty Co.
green
2 sentences1982Turner v. Bituminous Casualty Co., 397 Mich. 406 , 244 N.W.2d 873 (1976), followed Cyr in expanding this exception. [1] A second line of cases, begun by Ray v. Alad Corp., 19 Cal.3d 22 , 136 Cal. Rptr. 574 , 560 P.2d 3 (1977), developed a new exception to the general rule of a corporate successor's non-liability, the product-line exception: [A] party which acquires a manufacturing business and continues the output of its line of products ... assumes strict tort liability for defects in units of the same product line previously manufactured and distributed by the entity from which the business 1982Turner v. Bituminous Casualty Co., 397 Mich. 406 , 244 N.W.2d 873 (1976), followed Cyr in expanding this exception. [1] A second line of cases, begun by Ray v. Alad Corp., 19 Cal.3d 22 , 136 Cal. Rptr. 574 , 560 P.2d 3 (1977), developed a new exception to the general rule of a corporate successor's non-liability, the product-line exception: [A] party which acquires a manufacturing business and continues the output of its line of products ... assumes strict tort liability for defects in units of the same product line previously manufactured and distributed by the entity from which the business | 1 | 1982–1982 |
cluster 321143
green
1 sentence1982Offen & Co., 501 F.2d 1145 (1st Cir.1974), has expanded the continuity exception to the traditional rule by deleting a historical requirement of substantial identity of ownership. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Ray v. Alad Corp.
green
2 sentences1982Turner v. Bituminous Casualty Co., 397 Mich. 406 , 244 N.W.2d 873 (1976), followed Cyr in expanding this exception. [1] A second line of cases, begun by Ray v. Alad Corp., 19 Cal.3d 22 , 136 Cal. Rptr. 574 , 560 P.2d 3 (1977), developed a new exception to the general rule of a corporate successor's non-liability, the product-line exception: [A] party which acquires a manufacturing business and continues the output of its line of products ... assumes strict tort liability for defects in units of the same product line previously manufactured and distributed by the entity from which the business 1982Turner v. Bituminous Casualty Co., 397 Mich. 406 , 244 N.W.2d 873 (1976), followed Cyr in expanding this exception. [1] A second line of cases, begun by Ray v. Alad Corp., 19 Cal.3d 22 , 136 Cal. Rptr. 574 , 560 P.2d 3 (1977), developed a new exception to the general rule of a corporate successor's non-liability, the product-line exception: [A] party which acquires a manufacturing business and continues the output of its line of products ... assumes strict tort liability for defects in units of the same product line previously manufactured and distributed by the entity from which the business | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.