101 Ark. App. 289 - Applegate v. Applegate’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably 2009 Ark. App. 280 - Holifield v. Mullenax Financial & Tax Advisory Group, Inc. (2009), Balcom v. Crain (2016)
60 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Hicks Ex Rel. Feiock v. Feiock · Penfield Co of California v. Securities & Exchange Commission · In re Nevitt · Omni Holding & Development Corp. v. 3D.S.A., Inc. · Fitzhugh v. State
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[O]ur supreme court has set a bright-line rule that aids our resolution of the first question before us-whether the $500 attorney fee was in essence a "punitive fine" for criminal contempt. A contempt fine for willful disobedience that is payable to the complainant is remedial, and therefore constitutes a fine for civil contempt, but if the fine is payable to the court, it is punitive and constitutes a fine for criminal contempt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.