Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 460 F.3d 1162 - Clark v. Capital Credit & Collection Services, Inc.

Clark v. Capital Credit & Collection Services, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

460 F.3d 1162 · 2006

Citation profile

161
cited by 161 later decisions
5
states following
August 2021
most recently cited

32 federal appellate · 28 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 161 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably Donohue v. Quick Collect, Inc. (2010), McCollough v. Johnson, Rodenburg & Lauinger, LLC (2011)

32 federal appellate · 28 district · 5 state decisions

1140200620102020decided

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 United States v. Olano · Johnson v. Zerbst · United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc. · Brady v. United States · Connecticut National Bank v. Germain

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

  1. “A debt collector may not be held liable in any action brought under this sub-chapter if the debt collector shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[a] debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(a) ... [A] debt collector may not communicate with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt ... (2) if [it] knows the consumer is represented by an attorney with respect to such debt and has knowledge of, or can readily ascertain, such attorney’s name and address, unless the attorney fails to respond within a reasonable period of time to a communication from the debt collector or unless the attorney consents to direct communication with the consumer.”
    2 later decisions 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.