Lassiter v. Lassiter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 4 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. That the injunction be clearly and narrowly drawn so as not , to prohibit protected expression; 2. That the falsity or illegality of the expression be finally adjudicated prior to the issuance of the injunction; 3. That the falsity or illegality be established by at least a preponderance of evidence; 4. That the enjoined expression not be political in nature, or otherwise protected by the First Amendment, or on a subject so imbued with the public interest that its publication outweighs the social policy in the protection of reputation and privacy; and 5. That the usual equitable requirements for an injunction be met.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wedding v. Harmon · Hill v. Petrotech Resources Corp.

2. “The book is primarily of an inspirational and religious nature. Ms. Lassi-ter’s main theme in the book is how her faith and the power of prayer have seen her through many trying times in her life, including certain phases of her marriage and her divorce. She alleges ongoing mental cruelty and abuse by her husband throughout the marriage. She also states in the book that he physically assaulted her on two occasions. Further, she charges in the book that her husband committed adultery during the marriage. Although defendant did not mention plaintiff by name in the book, everybody who knew the couple knew to whom she was referring when she referred to her husband.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Gail Bierman and Beth Weier v. Scott Weier and Author Solutions, Inc.

3. “being responsible for the abuse of that liberty [to speak freely]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hill v. Petrotech Resources Corp.