State v. Polashek’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
10 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 5 U.S.C. § 552A (§ 3 of the Privacy Act of 1974)
Relies on Seider v. O'CONNELL · 208 Wis. 2d 361 - Truttschel v. Martin · 201 Wis. 2d 320 - Jungbluth v. Hometown, Inc. · 173 Wis. 2d 222 - State Ex Rel. Frederick v. McCaughtry · 208 Wis. 2d 18 - Anderson v. City of Milwaukee
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.
“seems inconsistent with the majority's conclusion that Wis. Stat. § 48.981 (7) is a strict liability statute. The majority relies on several factors in drawing its conclusion on the strict liability issue. Two of those factors, however, seem inconsistent with the majority's prior conclusion that”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Polashek“[T]he recipient's previous knowledge of the information does not alter the fact that a disclosure was made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Polashek
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.