5 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2006 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 |
|---|---|---|
Haag v. Stategreen2 sentences2005However, despite the avowed importance of the principle of stare decisis, this Court has also acknowledged that the doctrine "does not command blind allegiance to precedent." Gray, 654 So.2d at 554 ; see also Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614, 618 (Fla.1992) ("[S]tare decisis is not an ironclad and unwavering rule that the present always must bend to the voice of the past, however outmoded or meaningless that voice may have become."). 2005See Weiand v. State, 732 So.2d 1044 , 1055 n. 12 (Fla.1999) ("Although stare decisis is fundamentally important in our system of justice, it is not `an ironclad and unwavering rule' so that we must bend to the `voice of the past, however outmoded or meaningless that voice may have become.'") (quoting Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614, 618 (Fla.1992)); State v. Gray, 654 So.2d 552, 554 (Fla.1995) (same). | 3 | 3 |
Weiand v. Stategreen2 sentences2006While we agree that adhering to precedent is usually the wise policy, see Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 827 , 111 S.Ct. 2597 , 115 L.Ed.2d 720 (1991) ("Adhering to precedent `is usually the wise policy, because in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than it be settled right.'")(citing Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co., 285 U.S. 393, 406 , 52 S.Ct. 443 , 76 L.Ed. 815 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)), nevertheless our Supreme Court has continually reaffirmed that "[a]lthough stare decisis is fundamentally important in our system of justice, it is not 2005See Weiand v. State, 732 So.2d 1044 , 1055 n. 12 (Fla.1999) ("Although stare decisis is fundamentally important in our system of justice, it is not `an ironclad and unwavering rule' so that we must bend to the `voice of the past, however outmoded or meaningless that voice may have become.'") (quoting Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614, 618 (Fla.1992)); State v. Gray, 654 So.2d 552, 554 (Fla.1995) (same). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Graygreen2 sentences2005However, despite the avowed importance of the principle of stare decisis, this Court has also acknowledged that the doctrine "does not command blind allegiance to precedent." Gray, 654 So.2d at 554 ; see also Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614, 618 (Fla.1992) ("[S]tare decisis is not an ironclad and unwavering rule that the present always must bend to the voice of the past, however outmoded or meaningless that voice may have become."). 2005See Weiand v. State, 732 So.2d 1044 , 1055 n. 12 (Fla.1999) ("Although stare decisis is fundamentally important in our system of justice, it is not `an ironclad and unwavering rule' so that we must bend to the `voice of the past, however outmoded or meaningless that voice may have become.'") (quoting Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614, 618 (Fla.1992)); State v. Gray, 654 So.2d 552, 554 (Fla.1995) (same). | 1 | 2 |
Payne v. Tennesseegreen2 sentences2006While we agree that adhering to precedent is usually the wise policy, see Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 827 , 111 S.Ct. 2597 , 115 L.Ed.2d 720 (1991) ("Adhering to precedent `is usually the wise policy, because in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than it be settled right.'")(citing Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co., 285 U.S. 393, 406 , 52 S.Ct. 443 , 76 L.Ed. 815 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)), nevertheless our Supreme Court has continually reaffirmed that "[a]lthough stare decisis is fundamentally important in our system of justice, it is not 2006While we agree that adhering to precedent is usually the wise policy, see Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 827 , 111 S.Ct. 2597 , 115 L.Ed.2d 720 (1991) ("Adhering to precedent `is usually the wise policy, because in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than it be settled right.'")(citing Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co., 285 U.S. 393, 406 , 52 S.Ct. 443 , 76 L.Ed. 815 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)), nevertheless our Supreme Court has continually reaffirmed that "[a]lthough stare decisis is fundamentally important in our system of justice, it is not | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co.
green
2 sentences2006While we agree that adhering to precedent is usually the wise policy, see Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 827 , 111 S.Ct. 2597 , 115 L.Ed.2d 720 (1991) ("Adhering to precedent `is usually the wise policy, because in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than it be settled right.'")(citing Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co., 285 U.S. 393, 406 , 52 S.Ct. 443 , 76 L.Ed. 815 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)), nevertheless our Supreme Court has continually reaffirmed that "[a]lthough stare decisis is fundamentally important in our system of justice, it is not 2006While we agree that adhering to precedent is usually the wise policy, see Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 827 , 111 S.Ct. 2597 , 115 L.Ed.2d 720 (1991) ("Adhering to precedent `is usually the wise policy, because in most matters it is more important that the applicable rule of law be settled than it be settled right.'")(citing Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas Co., 285 U.S. 393, 406 , 52 S.Ct. 443 , 76 L.Ed. 815 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)), nevertheless our Supreme Court has continually reaffirmed that "[a]lthough stare decisis is fundamentally important in our system of justice, it is not | 1 | 2006–2006 |