Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 717 P2D 369 - Falke v. State

Falke v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently September 2018

10 state decisions

501986199020002010decided

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 Doe v. State · Gilbert v. State · Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, Inc. v. State · Hayes v. Charney · Painter v. Shaner

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

  1. “We find that Falke satisfies the criteria that determine whether a party is a public interest litigant. See Southeast Alaska Conservation Council v. State, 665 P.2d 544, 553 (Alaska 1983); 3 Thomas v. Croft, 614 P.2d 795, 798 (Alaska 1980) (“Plaintiffs who in good faith seek to vindicate the strong public policy favoring fair and correctly conducted elections should not be penalized by an assessment of attorney’s fees unless the suit is frivolous.”).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “1) whether the disputed issues are capable of repetition, 2) whether the mootness doctrine, if applied, may repeatedly circumvent review of the issues and, 3) whether the issues presented are so important to the public interest as to justify overriding the mootness doctrine.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “statutory candidate election deadlines are normally strictly enforced”
    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.