Clark v. Peabody Testing Service’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
208 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 210 later decisions — most recently December 2025 · most notably Prock v. Bull Shoals Boat Landing (2014), 7 Ark. App. 65 - Bearden Lumber Co. v. Bond (1983)
208 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 Herron Lumber Company v. Neal · Barksdale Lumber Co. v. McAnally · Wilson v. United Auto Workers International Union · Purdy v. Livingston · Potlatch Forests, Inc. v. Smith
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 210 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he reviewing court may perform its function to determine whether the commission's findings as to the existence or non-existence of the essential facts are or are not supported by the evidence.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(iv) (a) Injury where the accident was substantially occasioned by the use of alcohol, illegal drugs, or prescription drugs used in contravention of physician’s orders. (b) The presence of alcohol, illegal drugs, or prescription drugs used in contravention of a physician’s orders shall create a rebuttable presumption that the injury or accident was substantially occasioned by the use of alcohol, illegal drugs, or prescription drugs used in contravention of physician’s orders. (c) Every employee is deemed by his or her performance of services to have impliedly consented to reasonable and responsible testing by properly trained medical or law enforcement personnel for the presence of any of the aforementioned substances in the employee’s body. k(d) An employee shall not be entitled to compensation unless it is proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the alcohol, illegal drugs, or prescription drugs utilized in contravention of the physician’s orders did not substantially occasion the injury or accident.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The resolution of doubts and factual issues favorably to the claimant is a function of the commission, not of the courts, which must view and interpret the evidence and all reasonable inferences deducible therefrom in the light most favorable to the findings of the commission and give the testimony its strongest probative force in favor of the action of the commission, whether it favored the claimant or the employer.”
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.