Williams v. Frey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

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

1. ““It is well settled that the term ‘probable cause’ does not mean actual or positive cause, for the determination of the question whether the person causing the warrant to issue had probable cause to believe the party guilty is, on its face, a different question from the question whether the party was actually guilty. Otherwise crime would often go unpunished, for it would follow as a matter of law that the affiant must suffer in damages if an acquittal for any reason should occur. Ordinarily, if the facts and circumstances known to the person causing the warrant to issue are such as to justify a man of prudence and caution in believing that the offense has been committed, it is sufficient. Carroll v. United States, 267 U. S. 132 , 45 S. Ct. 280 , 69 L. Ed. 543 , 39 A. L. R. 790; 56 C. J. 1214, and cases cited.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Patrick v. Wigley · Tanique, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics & Dangerous Drugs

2. “It is suggested that the defendant did not do all within his power to discover the facts; that he should have inquired of the plaintiff's sister whether she had given him permission to take the articles ... [The doctrine announced in Roby v. Smith, 40 Okla. 280 , 188 P. 141 , which has since been followed, [states] as follows: [[Image here]] Where the defendant relies upon advice of counsel as a defense, the disclosure to counsel required of him before acting upon such advice is not a disclo-swre of all the facts discoverable, but all the facts within his knowledge. If he knows facts enough, either personally or by credible information, which, when fairly and fully stated to reputable counsel for the purpose of obtaining legal guidance, results in advice which is honestly followed in commencing the criminal proceeding, that is sufficient.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 2009 OK CIV APP 82 - Peterson v. Underwood

3. “. “Where the defendant relies upon advice of counsel as a defense, the disclosure to counsel required of him before acting upon such advice is not a disclosure of all the facts discoverable, but all the facts within his knowledge. If he knows facts enough, either personally or by credible information, which, when fairly and fully stated to reputable counsel for the purpose, of obtaining legal guidance, results in'advice which is honestly followed in commencing the criminal proceedings, that is sufficient.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Kirkpatrick v. Hollingsworth