Hurst v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
1 district · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably Scadden v. State (1987), DeWald v. State (1986)
1 district · 40 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.
Relationships
Relies on Worthington v. State · Wyoming State Treasurer v. City of Casper · State Board of Equalization v. Tenneco Oil Co. · Valentine v. Ormsbee Exploration Corp. · State v. Stovall
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A governmental entity is liable for damages resulting from bodily injury, wrongful death or property damage caused by the negligence of public employees while acting within the scope of their duties in the operation of any motor vehicle, aircraft or watercraft.” Section 1-39-105, W.S.1977, Cum.Supp.1985. “A governmental entity is liable for damages resulting from tortious conduct of law enforcement officers while acting within the scope of their duties.” Section 1-39-112, W.S.1977, Cum.Supp.1985.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“(a) A governmental entity and its public employees while acting within the scope of duties are granted immunity from liability for any tort except as provided by W.S. 1-39-105 through 1-39-112.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““Peace officer” means: (A) Any duly authorized sheriff, under sheriff or deputy sheriff; (B) Any duly authorized member of a municipal police force, a college or university campus police force or the Wyoming highway patrol; (C) Game and fish law enforcement personnel qualified pursuant to W.S. 9-1-701 through 9-1-707 and when enforcing Wyoming felony statutes following observation or discovery of the commission of a felony, during the performance of their statutory duties, or while responding to requests to assist other peace officers performing their official duties; (D) Agents of the division of criminal investigation appointed pursuant to W.S. 9-1-613 and capítol security personnel designated and appointed under W.S. 9-2 — 1023(a)(i) [§ 9-2-1023(a)(vi) ]; and (E) Inspectors of the Wyoming livestock board authorized under W.S. 11-20-201 who have qualified pursuant to W.S. 9-1-701 through 9-1-707 when enforcing W.S. 11-19-101 through 11 — 24— 115 and 11-29-101 through 11-30-113 and any laws prohibiting theft or mutilation of livestock or any part thereof.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Vigil v. Ruettgers
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.