No. 96-1843’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
13 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably General Motors Corp. v. Seay (2005), Todd v. Bear Valley Village Apartments (1999)
13 district · 6 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Hanson v. Denckla · Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is an inescapable fact of modern commercial life that a substantial amount of business is transacted solely by mail and wire communications across state lines, thus obviating the need for physical presence within a State in which business is conducted. So long as a commercial actor’s efforts are “purposefully directed” toward residents of another State, we have consistently rejected the notion that an absence of physical contacts can defeat personal jurisdiction there.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A court of this state having jurisdiction of the subject matter has jurisdiction over a person served in an action pursuant to s. 801.11 ...: In any action claiming injury to person or property within this state arising out of an act or omission outside this state by the defendant, provided in addition that at the time of the injury, either: (a) Solicitation or service activities were carried on within this state by or on behalf of the defendant; or (b) Products, materials or things processed, serviced or manufactured by the defendant were used or consumed within this state in the ordinary course of trade.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the verdict is against the weight of the evidence, the damages are excessive, or if for other reasons the trial was not fair to the moving party.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.