Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 101 F.3d 805 - Lee v. Edwards

Lee v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

101 F.3d 805 · 1996

Citation profile

142
cited by 142 later decisions
7
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

37 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 142 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Luciano v. Olsten Corp. (1997), Robert Linda Provost v. The City of Newburgh (2001)

37 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 state decisions

6501996200020102020decided

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

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore · Smith v. Wade · Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc. · Brower v. County of Inyo

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

  1. “(1) the degree of reprehensibility of the tortious conduct; (2) the ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages; and (3) the difference between this remedy and the civil penalties authorized or imposed in comparable cases.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “keep in mind the purpose of punitive damages: [which is] to punish the defendant and to deter him and others from similar conduct in the future. Thus, [the] task is to make certain that the punitive damages are reasonable in their amount and rational in light of their purpose to punish what has occurred and to deter its repetition.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “acted with deceit or malice as opposed to acting with mere negligence”
    3 later decisions 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.