State v. Hubbard’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Bollenbach v. United States · Vollmer v. Luety · 219 Wis. 2d 277 - Doyle v. Engelke · Wenke Ex Rel. Laufenberg v. Gehl Co. · 98 Wis. 2d 301 - Air Wisconsin, Inc. v. North Central Airlines, Inc.
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[g]iven the attention the term 'materially impaired' has attracted from the courts, the legislature, and the jury instruction committee, it is no wonder that a jury would also wrestle with what it actually means.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hubbard“Could the judge define "materially" impaired? Does this mean that he was impaired enough to have an effect on outcome? If not, what?”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hubbard“is incapable of driving safely, or is without proper control of all those faculties necessary to avoid danger to others.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Hubbard
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.