Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 69 MASSAPPCT 360 - Fisher v. Lint

Fisher v. Lint’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
3
states following
September 2022
most recently cited

10 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably Giuffrida v. High Country Investor, Inc. (2008), Wenger v. Aceto (2008)

10 district · 33 state decisions

240200720102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Butz v. Economou · Nader v. Citron · Correllas v. Viveiros · Duracraft Corp. v. Holmes Products Corp.

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

  1. ““As used in this section, the words ‘a party’s exercise of its right of petition’ shall mean any written or oral statement made before or submitted to a legislative, executive, or judicial body, or any other governmental proceeding', any written or oral statement made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial body, or any other governmental proceeding', any statement reasonably likely to encourage consideration or review of an issue by a legislative, executive, or judicial body or any other governmental proceeding ...” (emphasis added).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Whether [the litigation] privilege applies is determined on a case-by-case basis, after a fact-specific analysis, with a proper consideration of the balance between a plaintiff's right to seek legal redress for injuries suffered and the public policy supporting the application of such a strong protection from the burdens of the litigation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “absolutely privileged and cannot be used to support a civil liability even if the statements were uttered with malice”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.