Howe v. Hull’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 12182 (§ 302 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395D (§ 1812 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · United States v. Diebold, Inc. · Connecticut National Bank v. Germain
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]n individual may be hable as an operator of a pubhc accommodation where (a) he or she is in a position of authority; (b) wit,bin the ambit of this authority he or she has both the power and discretion to perform potentially discriminatory acts; and (c) the discriminatory acts are the result of the exercise of the individual’s own discretion, as opposed to the implementation of institutional policy or the mandates of superiors.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kuketz v. Petronelli
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.