Row v. Holt’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 3 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(a) A law enforcement officer may arrest a person when the officer has: (1) a warrant commanding that the person be arrested; ... (4) probable cause to believe the person is committing or attempting to commit a misdemeanor in the officer’s presence; (5) probable cause to believe the person has committed a: (A) battery resulting in bodily injury under IC 35-42-2-1; or (B) domestic battery under IC 35-42-2-1.3. The officer may use an affidavit executed by an individual alleged to have direct knowledge of the incident alleging the elements of the offense of battery to establish probable cause. 5”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Row v. Holt

2. “The terms "false arrest” and "false imprisonment” are virtually synonymous, and are sometimes considered to be the same tort. A false arrest is one means of committing a false imprisonment, and every false arrest has, at its core, a false imprisonment.... [A] distinction has been drawn between false arrest and false imprisonment in that a false arrest must be committed under assumption of legal authority whereas a false imprisonment may be committed without any pretense of legal authority.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 442 F. Supp. 2d 587 - Mayes v. City of Hammond, In