Foretich’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 district · 10 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) the plaintiff had access to channels of effective communication; (2) the plaintiff voluntarily assumed a role of special prominence in the public controversy; (3) the plaintiff sought to influence the resolution or outcome of the controversy; (4) the controversy existed prior to the publication of the defamatory statement; and (5) the plaintiff retained public-figure status at the time of the alleged defamation.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Eramo v. Rolling Stone, LLC · Edwards v. Schwartz

2. “A public controversy is not simply a matter of interest to the public; it must be a real dispute, the outcome of which affects the general public or some segment of it in an appreciable way.... [Essentially private concerns or disagreements do not become public controversies simply because they attract attention.... Rather, a public controversy is a dispute that in fact has received public attention because its ramifications will be felt by persons who are not direct participants.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Edwards v. Schwartz · Araya v. Deep Dive Media, LLC

3. “in fact has received public attention because its ramifications will be felt by persons who are not direct participants.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Gilmore v. Jones · Martin v. Committee for Honesty & Justice at Star Valley Ranch