Clarke v. Patton’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently May 2009
4 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 Succession of Simmons · Texana Oil & Refining Co. v. Belchic · First Nat. Bank v. Hinton · First Nat. Bank of Shreveport v. Pierson · Rappeport v. Patten
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘The party who seeks to avail himself of a change of domicile bears the burden of proving it. So long as any reasonable doubt remains, the presumption is that it has not been changed. The domicile of origin continues until another is acquired, animo et facto.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The defendant having failed to prove that he was domiciled in this State, the writ of attachment was properly issued and is well founded. In so far as defendant’s contention that the automobile is exempt from seizure, since we are of the opinion that he was not, at the time of the issuance of the writ, domiciled in this State, Article 644 of the Code of Practice is not available to him. See Lambeth v. Milton, 2 Rob. 81 , and cases annotated thereunder.”
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.