Patel v. Searles’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “First, this Circuit has never held that a challenged action must be directed at a protected relationship for it to infringe on the right to intimate association. But, in any event, [plaintiff] has alleged facts sufficient to prove that the officers’ conduct was intentionally directed at his family.” (emphasis in original) (citation omitted)); Butera v. District of Columbia, 235 F.3d 637 , 656 n. 23 (D.C.Cir.2001) (”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Gorman v. Rensselaer Cnty. · 894 F. Supp. 2d 443 - Deskovic v. City of Peekskill

2. “it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 777 F. Supp. 2d 893 - Tyco Fire Products LP v. Victaulic Co. · Deravin III v. Kerik

3. “accepting the allegations in the amended complaint as true and drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the [plaintiff].”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ass'n of Car Wash Owners Inc. v. City of N.Y. · Deravin III v. Kerik