Baska v. Scherzer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 10 district · 18 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The defendants’ acts of throwing punches in this case were intentional actions. Each defendant intended to strike at the other in order to cause harm. The defendants intended to punch, and they did punch. The fact that the punches in question hit the plaintiff rather than the defendants is immaterial to the analysis.” 283 Kan. at 764 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Thomas v. Benchmark Insurance · Unruh v. City of Wichita

2. “[T]here is no such thing as a 'negligent battery.' " (citation omitted) ); Love v. City of Port Clinton , 37 Ohio St.3d 98 , 524 N.E.2d 166 , 168 (1988) ("Where the essential character of an alleged tort is an intentional, offensive touching, the statute of limitations for assault and battery governs even if the touching is pled as an act of negligence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Susan Ryan v. napier/klein

3. “It is well to note the shooting in the Byrum Case was in fact intentional. The undersheriff intended to shoot and he did shoot. True, the injured party was not the robber as the undersheriff thought, but the act of shooting was nevertheless intentional.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Unruh v. City of Wichita