Badeaux v. STATE, DOTD’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
7 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 23 U.S.C. § 130 · 23 U.S.C. § 144 · 23 U.S.C. § 152 · 23 U.S.C. § 409
Relies on 549 So. 2d 840 - Rosell v. Esco · 341 So. 2d 332 - Coco v. Winston Industries, Inc. · 373 So. 2d 498 - Reck v. Stevens · 623 So. 2d 1257 - Youn v. Maritime Overseas Corp. · Theriot v. Allstate Ins. Co.
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of potential accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway crossings, pursuant to sections 130, 144, and 148 of this title or for the purpose of developing any highway safety construction improvement project which may be implemented utilizing Federal-aid highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
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.