7 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 27 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from HILLTOPPER HOLDING v. Estate of Cutchin.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | HILLTOPPER HOLDING v. Estate of Cutchin Anchor | green | “if the plaintiff fails to come forward with sworn proof to refute the allegations in the defendant's affidavit and to prove jurisdiction, the defendant's motion to dismiss must be granted.” | 8 |
| 2 | Hoffman v. Jones | green | “a district court of appeal does not have the authority to overrule a decision of the supreme court of florida” | 4 |
| 3 | Ford Motor Co. v. Atwood Vacuum MacHine Co. | green | “lack of direct presence and activity within the borders of florida.” | 3 |
| 4 | Adell Corp. v. Elco Textron, Inc. | green | “even assuming that atomic austria had knowledge that the stream of commerce would take its products into maine, mere awareness is insufficient to constitute purposeful availment.” | 3 |
| 5 | Miami Horizon Group, LLC v. Nova Casualty Co. | green | “the burden then shifts to the plaintiff to show, by counter-affidavit or other evidence, the basis upon which jurisdiction is proper.” | 3 |
| 6 | Bors v. Johnson & Johnson | green | “plaintiffs fail to satisfy the second prong of the specific jurisdiction test: the requirement that their claim arise out of imerys's purposeful contacts with the forum state.” | 3 |
| 7 | Rolls-Royce v. Spirit Airlines, Inc. | green | “specific personal jurisdiction exists when 'the alleged activities or actions of the defendant are directly connected to the forum state.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.