Clark v. Lacy’s Empirical Analysis
376 F.3d 682 · 2004
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Pisnoy v. Ahmed (2007), Adkins v. Vim Recycling, Inc. (2011)
11 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 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 Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Lumen Construction, Inc. v. Brant Construction Co. · Interstate Material Corporation v. City of Chicago · LaDuke v. Burlington Northern Railroad
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) whether either court has assumed jurisdiction over a res; (2) the [geographical] inconvenience of the federal forum; (3) the desirability of avoiding piecemeal litigation; (4) the order in which the forums obtained jurisdiction; (5) whether state or federal law controls; (6) the adequacy of the state forum to protect the parties’ interests; (7) the vexatious or contrived nature of the federal claim; and (8) respect for the principles underlying removal jurisdiction.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he two courts would oversee similar pre-trial motions and discovery matters and two different triers of fact would be asked to consider the same issues, evidence and witnesses.... Not only would a stay save judicial resources, but it would also protect against the danger of the two proceedings reaching inconsistent results”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the concurrent state and federal actions are actually parallel. Then, once it is established that the suits are parallel, the court must consider a number of non-exclusive factors that might demonstrate the existence of `exceptional circumstances.'”
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.