The Florida Bar v. Committe’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
15 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1692C (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act)
Relies on Heintz v. Jenkins · 600 So. 2d 457 - The Florida Bar v. MacMillan · 498 So. 2d 896 - The Florida Bar v. Vannier · 731 So. 2d 1249 - The Florida Bar v. Fredericks · 682 So. 2d 1070 - The Florida Bar v. Spann
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Neither the Bar nor this Court wishes to stifle innovative claims by attorneys. Nevertheless, under the rules of professional conduct, the pursuit of imaginative claims is not without limit. The standard embodied in rule 4-3.1, requiring a good-faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, is broad enough to encompass those cases where the claims are the result of innovative theories rather than, as here, an obsessive attempt to relitigate an issue that has failed decisively numerous times. The federal court in this case specifically found this claim to be frivolous and malicious.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.