Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 351 SO2D 21 - Cardenas v. Smathers

Cardenas v. Smathers’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
May 1982
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 263 So. 2d 797 - In Re Apportionment Law, Senate Joint Res. No. 1305

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

  1. “In other words, the apportionment plan as framed may be constitutional on its face, but upon its application in a particular case the joint resolution may violate organic law. This is in accord with our holdings that a statute may be valid as applied to one state of facts, though invalid as applied to another state of facts. See 4 F.L.P., Constitutional Law, § 10, p. 253, and authorities cited.”
    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.