Harasz v. Katz’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district ·

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

1. “If when Kennedy drafted the arrest affidavit he knowingly and deliberately misstated or misrepresented what Doe # 9 said during the August 11, 2011, forensic interview, with the intended effect of inculpating one or both Plaintiffs in criminal offenses in order to obtain a judicial warrant, Kennedy is probably liable for fabrication of evidence. .... [T]he merit of Plaintiffs' claim against officer Kennedy for ... fabrication of evidence will depend, at the end of the day, upon two pieces of evidence whose contents cannot reasonably be disputed... The tape [of Doe # 9's forensic interview] is available.... Kennedy's affidavit is in the record....Whether the contents of the affidavit accurately recite the substance of the interview, or materially misrepresent those contents, is a question forming the stuff of summary disposition by a trial judge or fact finding by a trial jury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Harasz v. Katz

2. “If Kennedy fabricated evidence as alleged by Plaintiffs, then Plaintiffs may also have satisfied the elements of a malicious prosecution claim. Reverting again to the four elements of malicious prosecution ... the acts of Kennedy in connection with the preparation and submission of the arrest warrants satisfy the first element: he may be regarded as an individual who initiated the criminal proceedings against Plaintiffs. The second element is also satisfied, since those proceedings were terminated in favor of both Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs have pled that even though the arrest warrant was issued, Kennedy acted without probable cause because of the alleged fabrication of evidence. Given that Kennedy is alleged to have fabricated evidence, the requisite malice has also been pled.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Harasz v. Katz

3. “), familiarity with which is assumed, the Court granted in part Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' complaint, and converted that motion to dismiss in part into motions for summary judgment. Those conversions resulted in three motions for summary judgment, which this Ruling resolves. I. Procedural Background At the pertinent times, Plaintiffs Harasz and Wirth resided in the Town of Glastonbury, Connecticut, and took in foster children for adoption under the supervision of the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Harasz v. Katz