King Kole, Inc. v. Bryant’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently November 2003 · most notably Tel Service Co. v. General Capital Corporation (1969), 416 So. 2d 455 - Department of Educ. v. Lewis (1982)
27 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 Blunson v. Knighton · Gray v. Central Florida Lumber Co. · 43 So. 2d 704 - McCord v. Smith · 80 So. 2d 337 - State v. Florida State Turnpike Authority · Wright v. Board of Public Instruction
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"... Over the years certain guidelines have evolved for testing the sufficiency of titles against the standard prescribed by Article III, Section 16, supra. The primary purpose of the requirements is to prevent `hodge-poge or log-rolling' legislation. Its object is to avoid surprise or fraud by fairly apprising the Legislature and the public of the subject of the legislation being enacted. State ex rel. Parrish v. Lee, 156 Fla. 578 , 23 So.2d 731 ; State v. Florida State Turnpike Authority, Fla., 80 So.2d 337 . The Legislature is allowed a wide latitude in the enactment of laws, and the courts will strike down a title only when there is a plain case of violating or ignoring the constitutional requirement. Wright v. Board of Public Instruction, Fla., 48 So.2d 912 ; Hillsborough County v. Price, Fla.App., 149 So.2d 912 . The title is sufficient if it fairly gives such notice as will reasonably lead to inquiry into the body thereof. Florida Power Corp. v. Pinellas Utility Board, Fla., 40 So.2d 350 ; McCord v. Smith, Fla., 43 So.2d 704 . The title need not be an index to the contents. It is not necessary that it delineate in detail the substance of the statute. McCord v. Smith, supra; Kirkland v. Phillips, Fla., 106 So.2d 909 ."”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Each law enacted in the Legislature shall embrace but one subject and matter properly connected therewith, which subject shall be briefly expressed in the title * * *."”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"It is sufficient to note that the power to classify for purposes of excise taxation is of wide range and flexibility. Once exercised it will not be disturbed unless the result is plainly unequal, arbitrary or discriminatory. * * *"”
2 later decisions 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.