644 F. Supp. 2d 112 - Ning Ye v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
10 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 241 (Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 1443 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1982 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985 · 42 U.S.C. § 1986
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Erickson v. Pardus · Masson v. New Yorker Magazine, Inc. · Omni Capital International, Ltd. v. Rudolf Wolff & Co.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a plaintiff must allege: “(i) a false and defamatory statement was written by the defendant about the plaintiff; (ii) the defendant published it without privilege to a third party; (iii) the defendant exhibited some fault in publishing the statement; and (iv) the statement is actionable as a matter of law or the publication has caused the plaintiff special harm.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.