District Court of Appeal of Florida· 4/2/1991
METRO. DADE COUNTY v. Yearby
Citations
- 580 So. 2d 186
- 1991 WL 45209
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that the established rule in Florida and the clear majority rule throughout the country is that an admission by a party opponent or his agent need not be based on the personal knowledge of the party or his agent
- involving collision in intersection at which stop sign had been knocked down
- statement by county employee in county's traffic accident report regarding county's knowledge of damaged stop sign was admissible against employer
- for a discussion of why a statement of a party opponent is an exception to the hearsay rule
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Schwartz, C.J., and Hubbart and Baskin
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
14 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Lee v. DHRSSupreme Court of Florida· 1997-06-19· cited 23×
- Scholz v. RDV Sports, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1998-03-27· cited 15×
- Ring Power Corporation v. Condado-PerezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2017-06-21· cited 9×
- State v. ElkinDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1992-02-11· cited 9×
- Candice Jones, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Ryland Nye v. Michael AlayonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2015-04-08· cited 7×
- PHILIP MORRIS USA INC., and R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO CO. v. ROSE POLLARI, etcDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2017-08-30· cited 6×
- Benjamin v. Tandem Healthcare, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2012-06-27· cited 6×
- Chaney v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1992-09-16· cited 5×
- Clark v. Polk CountyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2000-02-09· cited 4×
- Milhouse v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1996-05-10· cited 1×
- Ring Power Corporation v. Condado-PerezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2017-04-07
- Strong v. UnderwoodDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-06-21
- Murray v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 2001-01-11
- Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 2001-05-31
Cites
17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- MCI Communications Corporation and MCI Telecommunications Corporation v. American Telephone and Telegraph CompanySeventh Circuit· 1983-10-01· cited 490×
- United States v. AmmarThird Circuit· 1983-06-30· cited 237×
- Veteto v. WardenSupreme Court· 1983-10-11· cited 230×
- Rutherford v. StateAlaska Supreme Court· 1979-12-28· cited 51×
- Ruszcyk v. Secretary of Public SafetyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1988-01-06· cited 43×
- Florida Power & Light Company v. McCollumSupreme Court of Florida· 1962-01-31· cited 38×
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. First Interstate Bank of Des Moines, N.A. F/k/a United Central Bank of Des Moines, N.A.First Circuit· 1989-10-27· cited 29×
- Jolane Russell v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Eighth Circuit· 1981-12-15· cited 26×
- Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad CompanyEighth Circuit· 1980-03-05· cited 24×
- Dinter v. BrewerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1982-10-26· cited 20×
- In Re AH Robins Co., Inc.D. Kansas· 1983-12-09· cited 13×
- Cianci v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of RyeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1963-02-18· cited 12×
- Pillsbury Co. v. Cleaver-Brooks Division of Aqua-Chem, Inc.Eighth Circuit· 1981-04-22· cited 10×
- McGill v. FrasureIdaho Court of Appeals· 1990-04-05· cited 10×
- Smith v. CanevaryDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1989-12-12· cited 8×
- City of Miami v. FletcherDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1964-09-09· cited 7×
- ITT Continental Baking Co. v. EllisonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1977-03-15· cited 5×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.