177 Ind. App. 142 - Kuespert v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 state decisions

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

1. ““Kuespert, et al, contend that the trial court erred in denying plaintiffs’ claim for additional compensation pursuant to Acts, 1975, P.L. 343 § 2, p. 1844. We agree. “The only prerequisites contained in the act which must be met before the ‘emergency service allowance’ can be paid to an employee of the State Police are: (1) the employee must be a sworn State Police officer and (2) the officer must be on 24-hour call. The evidence clearly shows that limited State Police officers meet both criteria. Therefore, we hold that the trial court erred in granting the State’s motion for summary judgment on this matter.” (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Kuespert

2. ““The above appropriation designated ‘emergency service allowance’ is for the express purpose of compensating all sworn state police officers for being on call twenty-four (24) hours per day every day of the year. This allowance will amount to eight hundred forty dollars ($840) per year for each officer, and is to be paid in twenty-six (26) equal installments. In addition, all officers shall be paid merit increases and cost of living adjustments approved for state employees.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Kuespert