Sandberg v. Vincent’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[ (1) ] [w]hether the justification asserted by the requesting party is merely to avoid the annoyance and criticism that may attend any litigation or is to preserve privacy in a matter of a sensitive and highly personal nature; [ (2) ] whether identification poses a risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm to the requesting party or even more critically, to innocent non-parties; [ (3) ] the ages of the persons whose privacy interests are sought to be protected; [ (4) ] whether the action is against a governmental or private party; and [ (5) ] the risk of unfairness to the opposing party from allowing an action against it to proceed anonymously.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Sealed · Doe v. George Wash. Univ.

2. “Courts generally find a risk of retaliatory harm in cases where the moving party provides evidence that psychological damage or violent threats are anticipated if a party's identity is disclosed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Doe v. George Wash. Univ.

3. “[a] young person who has attained legal adulthood may have room to grow in maturity, [they] still [have] surpassed the age at which protected status is typically accorded.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Doe v. George Wash. Univ.