Elliott v. Elliott

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• containing detailed discussion of use of per curiam affir-mances, including explanation that affir-mance without written opinion signifies no error and written opinion would serve no useful purpose, but is not indication that appellate court overlooked any argument
• “[T]he notion that an appellate practitioner would view a per curiam disposition, without opinion, as lacking in a meaningful review is absolutely astounding.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Oasis Publishing Co. v. West Publishing Co.
  D. Minnesota· 1996-05-17· cited 6×
• Crittenden v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-08-19· cited 4×
• Weidmann v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-07-21

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• Taylor v. Knight
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1970-03-17· cited 7×