White v. Muniz’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently October 2025
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 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 Hall v. Walter · Horton v. Reaves · 198 Wis. 2d 450 - Gould v. American Family Mutual Insurance · Brzoska v. Olson · Johnson v. Lambotte
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) An actor is subject to liability to another for battery if (a) he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and (b) an offensive [or harmful] contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results. (2) An act which is not done with the intention stated in Subsection (1, a) does not make the actor liable to the other for a mere offensive contact with the other’s person although the act involves an unreasonable risk of inflicting it and, therefore, would be negligent or reckless if the risk threatened bodily harm.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[It is necessary that an act be done for the purpose of bringing about a harmful or offensive contact ... to another or to a third person or with knowledge that such a result will, to a substantial certainty, be produced by his act. It is not enough to make the act intentional that the actor realize that it involves any degree of probability of a harmful or offensive contact ..., less than a substantial certainty that it will so result. ©”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the mentally disabled are held to the reasonable person standard in negligence actions”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McCall v. Meyers
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.