Imperial v. Drapeau’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
1 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently June 2019
1 district · 12 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Liteky v. United States · Tennessee v. Middlebrooks · Goodwich v. Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Inc. · Rosenberg v. Helinski · Keys v. Chrysler Credit Corp.
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The condition attached to all such qualified privileges is that they must be exercised in a reasonable manner and for a proper purpose. The immunity is forfeited if the defendant steps outside of the scope of the privilege, or abuses the occasion. Thus, qualified privilege does not extend, in any of the above cases, to the publication of irrelevant defamatory matter with no bearing upon the public or private interest which is entitled to protection; nor does it include publication to any person other than those whose hearing of it is reasonably believed to be necessary or useful for the furtherance of that interest." (Footnotes omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Imperial v. Drapeau“Id. In the instant matter Drapeau cites Arroyo v. Rosen, 102 Md.App. 101 , 648 A.2d 1074 (1994), where the Court of Special Appeals declined to extend the absolute privilege for participants in judicial proceedings to statements made to academic bodies of inquiry by one scientist reporting allegedly unscientific practices by another scientist. Ultimately, most of the charges were found to be untrue; a defamation suit ensued, and the defamed scientist was awarded damages. The author of the defamatory statements urged an extension of the privilege to cover”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Imperial v. Drapeau“by Drapeau were maliciously made with full knowledge of their falsity, that their target was an individual who was not a public official or a public figure, and that they were disseminated in a manner that assured the maximum damage to their victim. We can imagine the distress Drapeau felt when he was informed by his rescue squad chief that the Governor, his Congressperson, and his County Executive had all demanded an investigation because they were”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Imperial v. Drapeau
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.