McKee v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 state decisions

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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Our decision in Copeland, supra, was the result of a finding that the act in question was basically deficient in title. We did not declare it unconstitutional because of substance. The action of the Legislature in 1955 via Chapter 29923, Laws of Florida, cured the deficiency of form pointed out in Copeland . This ‘curing’ concept is in accord with the law and policy of our state. As we said in State ex rel. Badgett v. Lee, 156 Fla. 291 , 22 So.2d 804 , speaking through Mr. Justice Thomas: ‘We adopt the rule that an act, the title of which is insufficient, may become valid by incorporation in a general revision of the laws whether the insufficiency has been adjudicated or not.’ (at 807) “Clearly, and we indicated the same in Badgett, supra, incorporation in a general revision of the statutes will not cure a particular act of any unconstitutionality of content. As previously stated, however, the deficiency herein was in regard to form or title — not substance or content.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Beatty v. State

2. “[I]f the law deals alike with all of a certain class the equal protection concept is not violated.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 326 So. 2d 4 - O'DONNELL v. State