Dyer v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"We note that in Article 9 of his petition, plaintiff alleges a conspiracy between defendants in the publication of the allegedly offensive editorial and in Article 10 avers as a fact that the defamatory nature of the comment was known to defendants. In paragraphs 14 and 16 it is avowed in substance that the alleged conspiracy was deliberate, willful, false, and malicious. For the purposes of disposing of the exception of no cause of action, it suffices to state the allegations noted bring the case within the rule of the New York Times decisions, supra, which in effect hold that as regards public officials, to be actionable a libel must be with `actual malice,' which means it must be knowingly false or made with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not. The essence of the verbiage chosen by plaintiff to state his case is what determines whether he has in fact stated a cause of action. The language employed in the case at bar in substance charges actual malice in that it alleges a deliberate and willfully false statement, the equivalent of knowingly false. We hold, therefore, the petition states a cause of action in law."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 104 Ill. App. 2d 271 - Doctors Convalescent Center, Inc. v. East Shore Newspapers, Inc.

2. “Article asserting that candidate for office of insurance commissioner was a dud, an ignorant man who let the public think he was a lawyer while not being versed in elemental insurance law of the state, that the candidate was an amateur, and that his pre-election promises pledged him to do what he could not do constituted comment and criticism of candidate’s personal integrity and professional skill as defendant believed them to be revealed by candidate’s campaign promises and did not entitle candidate to recover for libel in absence of showing of actual malice. (Hn.9)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 30 Fla. Supp. 1 - West v. Florida Publishing Co.

3. “The New York Times rule is not rendered inapplicable merely because an official's private reputation, as well as his public reputation, is harmed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 211 So. 2d 122 - Sas Jaworsky v. Padfield