Carroll v. Kartell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[g]eneralized apprehension, nervousness, feeling aggravated or hassled,”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 92 Mass. App. Ct. 1130 - C.E.M. v. J.A.L. · 92 Mass. App. Ct. 1129 - M.K. v. D.K.

2. “Accordingly, we consider whether 'the actions and words of the defendant placed [the plaintiff] in reasonable apprehension that physical force might be used against her.' " Carroll v. Kartell , supra , quoting from Commonwealth v. Robicheau , 421 Mass. 176 , 181 (1995). "The standard for determining whether a defendant's acts rise to the level of abuse, however, is not subjective. Rather, the court looks to whether the plaintiff's apprehension that force may be used is reasonable.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 92 Mass. App. Ct. 1129 - M.K. v. D.K.

3. “"[t]he judge must focus on whether serious physical harm is imminent and should not issue a c. 209A order on the theory that it will do no harm, i.e., 'seems to be a good idea or because it will not cause the defendant any real inconvenience.' Wooldridge v. Hickey , 45 Mass. App. Ct. [637,] 639 [ (1998) ], quoting from Smith v. Joyce , 421 Mass. 520 , 523 n.1 (1995)."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 92 Mass. App. Ct. 1130 - C.E.M. v. J.A.L.