Knelman v. Middlebury College’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 district · 4 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) An assessment of whether the specific-language in issue has a precise meaning which is readily understood or whether it is indefinite and ambiguous; (2) a determination of whether the statement is capable of being objectively characterized as true or false; (3) an examination of the full context of the communication in which the statement appears; and (4) a consideration of the broader social context or setting surrounding the communication including the existence of any applicable customs or conventions which “might signal to readers or listeners that what is being read or heard is likely to be opinion, not fact.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Soojung Jang v. Trs. of St. Johnsbury Acad. · 123 F. Supp. 3d 517 - Grega v. Pettengill

2. “[l]anguage in a college handbook or other official statement that is merely aspirational in nature, or that articulates a general statement of a school's 'ideals,' 'goals,' or 'mission,' is not enforceable”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Grubach v. Univ. of Akron

3. “a breach of contract claim will not arise from the failure to fulfill a statement of goals or ideals”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Grubach v. Univ. of Akron