Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 703 F.2d 10 - Gashgai v. Leibowitz

Gashgai v. Leibowitz’s Empirical Analysis

703 F.2d 10 · 1983

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
May 2009
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2009

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

100198319902000decided

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 Runyon v. McCrary · Board of Regents of Univ. of State of NY v. Tomanio · Ahumada v. United States · Burns v. Sullivan · 182 Pa. Super. 86 - Hull v. Curtis Publishing 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The purpose of statutes of limitations is to allow a plaintiff a reasonable time to realize the nature and extent of his injuries and file a lawsuit and, after that time passes, to bar actions and thereby relieve potential defendants of the anxiety of litigation. The appropriate length of statutes of limitations is governed by the kinds of injuries which particular causes of action protect and the speed at which they become apparent to the plaintiff. The injuries which may result from defamation and invasion of privacy are similar in nature and injuries resulting from defamation may arise, as a general rule, no faster than those resulting from invasion of privacy. Publications which may give rise to liability under both torts travel through the same media at the same speed. That a particular act may give rise to a cause of action under both torts but that the two statutes of limitations may differ in such cases baffles the court as well as the layman and gives substance to Dickens' observation about the nature of the law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “assigning a [longer] statute of limitations for `false light' actions would often in the many cases where `false light' actions and defamation coincide defeat the obvious legislative intent to impose a relatively short period of limitations for the bringing of defamation actions.”
    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.