Bryant v. Picado’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently September 2020
14 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on State v. Epperson · UHS of Arkansas, Inc. v. Charter Hospital of Little Rock, Inc. · Handy Dan Improvement Center, Inc. v. Adams · Union Pacific RR Co. v. State Ex Rel. Faulkner Cty. · Bennett v. N.A.A.C.P.
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under our declaratory judgment act, courts of record within their respective jurisdictions have the power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. Ark.Code Ann. § 16 — 111— 103(a) (1987). The act itself does not confer subject-matter jurisdiction; thus, there must be an independent basis for the court’s jurisdiction before it may render a declaratory judgment. UHS of Ark., Inc. v. Charter Hosp. of Little Rock, Inc., 297 Ark. 8 , 759 S.W.2d 204 (1988). Courts of equity do not have jurisdiction to render declaratory judgments where the subject matter is not cognizable in a court of equity. City of Garland v. Miller County, 270 Ark. 981 , 606 S.W.2d 751 (1980). The pertinent inquiry is whether exclusive jurisdiction of the subject matter is vested in a particular tribunal by the Arkansas Constitution. Daley v. Digby, 272 Ark. 267 , 613 S.W.2d 589 (1981).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“equity will not entertain a contest over the validity of a statute nor restrain prosecutions pending the determination of the validity thereof where an adequate remedy at law exists.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jegley v. Picado
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.