Commonwealth v. Kerns’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
August 2021
most recently cited
14 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Mickens v. Taylor · Cummings v. National Shawmut Bank of Boston · Commonwealth v. Chalifoux · Home Savings Bank v. Savransky · Gurley v. Commonwealth
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.
“Whoever willfully communicates . . . either directly or indirectly, orally, in writing, by . . . telecommunication device ... a threat [that] an explosive or incendiary device . . . will be used at a place or location, or is present or will be present at a place or location, whether or not the same is in fact used or present. . . shall be punished . . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“We do not require proof that the threat actually caused the victim of the threat to fear that the threatened crime or injury might be inflicted”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Whether the threat was made in attending 'circumstances that would justify apprehension' is measured by means of an objective standard”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.