Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 111 F. Supp. 2d 222 - Soto v. Apple Towing

111 F. Supp. 2d 222 - Soto v. Apple Towing’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
July 2016
most recently cited

2 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1446 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams · Lawrence Marcus Marc Kasky, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. At&t Corp., Jeffrey A. Moss, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, Donna Borok Moss v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company · Leffall v. Dallas Independent School District · Lowe v. Champion · Lowe v. Champion

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.

  1. “[T]he information supporting removal in a copy of an amended pleading, motion, order or other paper must be `unequivocally clear and certain' to start the time limit running for a notice of removal under the second paragraph of section 1446(b). This clearer threshold promotes judicial economy. It should reduce `protective' removals by defendants faced with an equivocal record. It should also discourage removals before their factual basis can be proven by a preponderance of the evidence through a simple and short statement of the facts. In short, a bright-line rule should create a fairer environment for plaintiffs and defendants.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]here is no requirement in 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) that a defendant exercise a duty to investigate, and this Court will not read into the statute such a condition. To do so would invite wasteful litigation as parties spar over the issues of diligence and ascertainability.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “an extensive investigation to determine the truth”
    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.