Lowrimore v. Dimmitt’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably Boyer v. State (1991), Haynes v. Hamilton County (1994)
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 25 state decisions
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.
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“decisions involving the making of policy, but not to routine decisions made by employees in the course of their day-to-day activities, even though the decision involves a choice among two or more courses of action.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"(c) Any claim based upon the performance of or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty, whether or not the discretion is abused."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The pursuit continued at speeds of 80-90 miles per hour through populated sections of Salem, in which the posted speed limit was 25 mph. Before reaching the intersection where the collision between Dimmitt’s car and the plaintiff’s car occurred, Dimmitt and the officer went through a 4-way stop without stopping. Continuing a high speed chase under the circumstances present in this case might be found to create a risk of harm to others using the highway. A trier of fact might reasonably find that the pursued driver would injure third persons as a foreseeable consequence of the pursuit by the police officer. Dimmitt’s actions may have been a more direct cause of the plaintiff’s harm in the sense that the collision involved their cars, but given the nature of the risk created by the high speed pursuit, injury to third persons may be found to be a foreseeable result of the officer’s continuation of the pursuit.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.