87 F. Supp. 3d 1018 - Opperman v. Path, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 47 U.S.C. § 230 (Communications Decency Act § 230)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Warth v. Seldin · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the degree of intrusion, the context, conduct and circumstances surrounding the intrusion as well as the intruder's motives and objectives, the setting into which he intrudes, and the expectations of those whose privacy is invaded.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the presence or absence of opportunities to consent voluntarily to activities impacting privacy interests obviously affects the expectations of the participant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a plaintiff must do more than point to the dollars in a defendant's pocket; he must sufficient[ly] allege that in the process he lost dollars of his own.”
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.