Betts-Lucas v. Hartmann’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 19 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-America Marine Supply Corp. · Kanagawa v. State by and Through Freeman · Rustici v. Weidemeyer · Rodriguez v. Suzuki Motor Corp. · Hankins v. Finnel
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An abuse of discretion is committed if the trial court's decision defies logic under the circumstances, is sufficiently arbitrary and unreasonable to shock the conscience of the court, and exhibits a dearth of careful consideration.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“summary judgment may not be the most efficient way to resolve a case where the parties agree as to the facts.” Betts-Lucas v. Hartmann, 87 S.W.3d 310 , 315 n. 5 (Mo.App. W.D.2002).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Archey v. Carnahan“the exercise of reason in the adaption of means to an end and discretion in determining how or whether an act should be done or a course pursued.”
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.