Dawkins v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “[H]ere, Plaintiffs conduct in threatening to contact news outlets (as well as his apparent conduct of twice actually calling such news outlets) was not “part” of his “larger endeavor to obtain recompense for a perceived wrong,” since it was not a step that was necessary to pursue some sort of legal remedy (for example, filing a complaint against Defendant with an attorney grievance committee of the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court, or by filing a civil action against Defendant in New York State Supreme Court). Rather, the record evidence indicates that this conduct was a significant tool that Plaintiff used as a last resort, after his other threats had apparently failed, in order to try to extract an increased and exorbitant sum of money from Defendant.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 175 F. Supp. 3d 280 - Bouveng v. NYG Capital LLC

2. “officers may rely upon information or direction from another officer because the directing officer is presumed to possess probable cause.” Dawkins v. Williams, 511 F.Supp.2d 248, 276 (N.D.N.Y.2007) (internal quotation marks omitted). As a result, where, as here, the validity of the arrest is challenged,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 50 F. Supp. 3d 411 - Diop v. City of New York