Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 705 NE2D 468 - Garza v. Lorch

Garza v. Lorch’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
May 2008
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Kahn v. Cundiff · Mishawaka St. Joseph. L. T. Co. v. Neu, Gdn. · Kahn v. Cundiff · Walker v. Lawson · Henshilwood v. Hendricks County

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"[A] claim or defense is "frivolous (a) if it is taken primarily for the purpose of harassing or maliciously injuring a person, or (b) if the lawyer is unable to make a good faith and rational argument on the merits of the action, or (c) if the lawyer is unable to support the action taken by a good faith and rational argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law. [A] claim or defense is unreasonable if, based on a totality of the cireumstances, including the law and facts known at the time of the filing, no reasonable attorney would consider that the claim or defense was worthy of litigation or justified. [A] claim or defense is groundless if no facts exist which support the legal claim relied on and presented by the losing party."”
    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.