82 F. Supp. 2d 702 - Mineer v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. The wrongdoer’s conduct must be intentional or reckless; 2. The conduct must be outrageous and intolerable in that it offends against the generally accepted standards of decency and morality; 3. There must be a causal connection between the wrongdoer’s conduct and the emotional distress; and 4. The emotional distress must be severe.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Mik v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. · Paul Mik, Jr. v. Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp.

2. ““a. The right protected by the action for invasion of privacy is a personal right, peculiar to the individual whose privacy is invaded. The cause of action is not assignable, and it cannot be maintained by other persons such as members of the individual’s family, unless their own privacy is invaded along with his. The only exception to this rule involves the appropriation to the defendant’s own use of another’s name or likeness. (See § 652C, particularly Comment a). “b. In the absence of statute, the action for the invasion of privacy cannot be maintained after the death of the individual whose privacy is invaded. In a few states particular statutes permit the survival of an action for invasion of privacy that has occurred before death. In a smaller number of states there is statutory authorization for an action on the part of surviving relatives for invasion of the privacy of one who is already deceased, with the invasion occurring after his death. Since appropriation of name or likeness is similar to impairment of a property right and involves an aspect of unjust enrichment of the defendants or his estate, survival rights may be held to exist following the death of either party.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nicholas v. Nicholas

3. “Where such conduct is directed at a third person, the actor is subject to liability if he intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress: (a) to a member of such person’s immediate family who is present at the time, whether or not such distress results in bodily harm; or (b) to any other person who is present at the time, if such distress results in bodily harm.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 496 F. Supp. 2d 1 - Holland v. Islamic Republic of Iran