49 F. Supp. 2d 615 - Coakley v. Jaffe’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “‘[PJrivate persons, jointly engaged with state officials in the challenged action, are acting ‘under color' of law for purposes of § 1983 [claims],’ even if the state actor himself is immune from liability.” (quoting Dennis, 449 U.S. at 27-28 , 101 S.Ct. 183 )). 35 . As a threshold matter, as noted supra, plaintiffs have asserted a § 1983 claim for deprivation of their Fourteenth Amendment”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 774 F. Supp. 2d 457 - Anilao v. Spota

2. “But 'favorable termination’ for purposes of sealing ... is considerably broader than ‘favorable termination' for purposes of a malicious prosecution claim or the like,” Coakley, 49 F.Supp.2d at 623 n. 4, and thus the sealing of the file has no relevance to whether Gennimi”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 640 F. Supp. 2d 351 - Manbeck v. Micka

3. “It is well established, however, that the interest on which plaintiffs here primarily rely — `business reputation' — falls outside the protection of the due process clause.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Med Corp. v. City of Lima