George v. Dade’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 district · 7 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A]n action may not be maintained against the District of Columbia for unliquidated damages to person or property unless, within six months after the injury or damage was sustained, the claimant, his agent, or attorney has given notice in writing to the Mayor of the District of Columbia of the approximate time, place, cause, and circumstances of the injury or damage. A report in writing by the Metropolitan Police Department, in regular course of duty, is a sufficient notice under this section.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Coleman v. Clark · 466 F. Supp. 2d 51 - Anderson-Bey v. District of Columbia

2. “‘[t]he purpose of the [statute] is ... to assist [the District of Columbia] in the defense of the public interest where claims are made ... so long after the event that it is impossible for the District of Columbia to obtain evidence for use in litigation....'”) (quoting H.R.Rep. No.2010, 72d Cong., 2d Sess. 1 (1933)); cf. Hendel v. World Plan Exec. Council, 705 A.2d 656, 667 (D.C.1997) (explaining that, for statute-of-limitations purposes, this court has held that”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. DeWITT v. District of Columbia

3. “to ensure adequate opportunity for investigation to determine facts, and to protect District revenues against unreasonable claims”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Coleman v. Clark