Clark v. Florida’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
61 federal appellate · 11 district · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 139 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2025 · most notably McPherson v. Kelsey (1997), Dean v. Barber (1992)
61 federal appellate · 11 district · 20 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 State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. JUDGES, ETC. · Rogers v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTO. INS. CO.
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 139 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Count I ... . 2. That ... Respondent received a speeding ticket to which he pled not guilty. 3. That ... Respondent was found guilty of such speeding ticket ... and fined $100.00. ... . 6. That on or about September 4, 1984 the Circuit Court, Fifth Judicial Circuit, in and for Lake County, Florida, sitting in its appellate capacity, affirmed the Lake County Court decision [imposing the fine], without opinion. 7. That on or about February 14, 1985 Respondent filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Fifth District Court of Appeal of Florida to review such September 4, 1984 order of the Circuit Court. 8. That pursuant to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.100(c), such petition for writ of certiorari should have been filed within 30 days of the order sought to be reviewed, or by October 4, 1984 in the instant case. 9. That Respondent argued such petition was timely under an exception to the rule where denial of appellate review would be fundamentally unfair. 10. That Respondent contended such denial of appellate review would be fundamentally unfair since Respondent had not received notice of the Fifth Judicial Circuit's order of affirmance until January 14, 1985. 11. That Respondent's failure to receive such notice was due to his change of address and failure to inform the Court of such change. 12. That on or about April 15, 1985 the Fifth District Court of Appeal dismissed Respondent's petition for writ of certiorari due to lack of jurisdiction. 13. That on or about ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he dangers of a system of legal education that trains students in technique without instilling a sense of professional responsibility and ethics a bit like giving a small boy a loaded pistol without instruction as to when and how it is to be used.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“so utterly frivolous as to not warrant any further discussion.”
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.